Spoilers? Evaluating the Logic Behind Partisan Disaffiliation Requirements for Independent and Third-Party Candidates

IF 1.3 Q1 LAW Election Law Journal Pub Date : 2016-12-01 DOI:10.1089/ELJ.2016.0370
ChamberlainAdam, KlarnerCarl
{"title":"Spoilers? Evaluating the Logic Behind Partisan Disaffiliation Requirements for Independent and Third-Party Candidates","authors":"ChamberlainAdam, KlarnerCarl","doi":"10.1089/ELJ.2016.0370","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this article, we evaluate the rationale behind partisan disaffiliation laws, which prevent a candidate from running as an independent or from switching parties if they have not adequately severed their ties to an existing party. One prominent justification for these laws is that they help prevent voter confusion, which may result in the most preferred candidate losing. Utilizing a database of state legislative elections from 1968 to 2014, we categorize independent and third-party candidates into two groups: those who have run in the past as a Democrat or Republican, whom we refer to as former major-party candidates (FMPs), and those who have always run as a non-major party candidate (ANMs). The findings reveal that the latter appear less strategic about where to run, and they are unlikely to run again. In contrast, FMPs are much more likely to have held state legislative office and are more likely to have run multiple times; they are also more strategic, running under conditions that are advan...","PeriodicalId":45644,"journal":{"name":"Election Law Journal","volume":"15 1","pages":"330-350"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1089/ELJ.2016.0370","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Election Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/ELJ.2016.0370","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Abstract In this article, we evaluate the rationale behind partisan disaffiliation laws, which prevent a candidate from running as an independent or from switching parties if they have not adequately severed their ties to an existing party. One prominent justification for these laws is that they help prevent voter confusion, which may result in the most preferred candidate losing. Utilizing a database of state legislative elections from 1968 to 2014, we categorize independent and third-party candidates into two groups: those who have run in the past as a Democrat or Republican, whom we refer to as former major-party candidates (FMPs), and those who have always run as a non-major party candidate (ANMs). The findings reveal that the latter appear less strategic about where to run, and they are unlikely to run again. In contrast, FMPs are much more likely to have held state legislative office and are more likely to have run multiple times; they are also more strategic, running under conditions that are advan...
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
剧透吗?评估独立候选人和第三党候选人脱离党派要求背后的逻辑
在本文中,我们评估了党派分离法背后的基本原理,该法律禁止候选人在没有充分切断与现有政党的联系的情况下以独立人士身份竞选或转换政党。这些法律的一个重要理由是,它们有助于防止选民困惑,这可能导致最受欢迎的候选人失败。利用1968年至2014年的州立法选举数据库,我们将独立候选人和第三方候选人分为两组:过去曾以民主党或共和党身份参选的候选人,我们将其称为前主要政党候选人(fmp),以及一直以非主要政党候选人(ANMs)参选的候选人。研究结果显示,后者在选择逃跑地点时显得不那么有策略,而且他们不太可能再次逃跑。相比之下,fmp更有可能担任过州立法办公室,更有可能多次竞选;它们也更具战略性,在更先进的条件下运行……
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
16.70%
发文量
13
期刊最新文献
Dropbox Allocation and Use Among Georgia Voters in the 2020 Election Voter Information Search and Ranked Choice Voting Can Election Administration Overcome the Effects of Restrictive State Voting Laws? Assessing Precinct Consolidation Strategies Through Simulation Optimization Does the Framing of Information Regarding Foreign Election Interference Matter? Evidence from a Survey Experiment in Canada
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1