Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T00:50:12.625Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mobilizing Candidates: Political Actors Strategically Shape the Candidate Pool with Personal Appeals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 October 2014

David E. Broockman
David E. Broockman*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, University of California, Berkeley, 210 Barrows Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA; e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Politicians' personal beliefs and backgrounds strongly influence politics and policy. But why do individuals with particular beliefs and backgrounds tend to run for office and become politicians? This paper argues that parties and interest groups strategically shape the candidate pool from which voters choose by mobilizing certain individuals to run for office, much like they strategically shape the electorate by mobilizing like-minded individuals to vote. Supporting this view, I first unearth decades of previously disparate evidence suggesting that candidate mobilization efforts are widespread. I then present results from an experiment embedded in an actual candidate mobilization effort that finds encouragement to run for office can meaningfully increase interest in candidacy. Implications and opportunities for further research are discussed.

Keywords

Strategic mobilizationcandidate recruitmentfield experiment
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Experimental Political Science , Volume 1 , Issue 2 , Winter 2014 , pp. 104 - 119
Copyright
Copyright © The Experimental Research Section of the American Political Science Association 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abramson, P. R., Aldrich, J. H., and Rohde, D. W. 1987. Progressive Ambition Among United States Senators: 1972–1988. Journal of Politics 49 (1): 3–35.Google Scholar
Aldrich, J. H. 1995. Why Parties? The Origin and Transformation of Party Politics in America. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Aldrich, J. H. 2000. Southern Parties in State and Nation. Journal of Politics 62 (3): 643–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbour, H., Bradshaw, S., Fleischer, A., Fonalledas, Z., and McCall, G. 2013. Growth and Opportunity Project. Republican National Committee, http://goproject.gop.com/RNC_Growth_Opportunity_Book_2013.pdf.Google Scholar
Barron, J., Crawley, G., and Wood, T. 1989. Drift and Resistance: Refining Models of Political Recruitment. Policy & Politics 17 (3): 207–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, L. 2008. Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Bawn, K., Cohen, M., Karol, D., Masket, S., Noel, H., and Zaller, J. 2012. A Theory of Political Parties: Groups, Policy Demands, and Nominations in American Politics. Perspectives on Politics 10 (3): 571–97.Google Scholar
Bendavid, N. 2007. The Thumpin'. New York, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Bjarnegard, E. 2013. Gender, Informal Institutions, and Political Recruitment. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Black, G. S. 1972. A Theory of Political Ambition: Career Choices and the Role of Structural Incentives. American Political Science Review 66 (1): 144–59.Google Scholar
Broockman, D. E. 2013. Black Politicians Are More Intrinsically Motivated to Advance Blacks' Interests. American Journal of Political Science 57 (3): 521–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broockman, D. E., Carnes, N., Crowder-Meyer, M., and Skovron, C. 2013. 2012 National Candidate Study, http://candidatestudy.org/National_Candidate_Study/Home.html Google Scholar
Bowman, L., and Boynton, G. R. 1966. Recruitment Patterns Among Local Party Officials: A Model and Some Preliminary Findings in Selected Locales. American Political Science Review 60 (3): 667–76.Google Scholar
Burden, B. C. 2007. The Personal Roots of Representation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Carnes, N. 2014. Who's Keeping Working-Class Americans Out of Office? Political Gatekeepers and the Unequal Social Class Makeup of Government. Working paper, Duke University, Durham, NC.Google Scholar
Carson, J. L., Engstorm, E. J., and Roberts, J. M. 2007. Candidate Quality, the Personal Vote, and the Incumbency Advantage in Congress. American Political Science Review 101 (2): 289–301.Google Scholar
Christensen, C., Fierst, D., Jocody, A., and Lorenz, D. N. 1998. Answering the Call for Prosocial Behavior. Journal of Social Psychology 138 (5): 564–71.Google Scholar
Cohen, M., Karol, D., Noel, H., and Zaller, J. 2008. The Party Decides: Presidential Nominations Before and After Reform. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cox, G. W. and McCubbins, M. D. 1993. Legislative Leviathan: Party Government in the House. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Cox, G. W. and Katz, J. N. 2002. Elbridge Gerry's Salamander: The Electoral Consequences of the Reapportionment Revolution. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Crowder-Meyer, M. 2011. Candidate Recruitment and Party Networks: How the Characteristics and Choices of Local Party Leaders Affect Women's Representation. Presented at the 2011 Meeting of The American Political Science Association, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
Fowler, L. L. 1993. Candidates, Congress, and the American Democracy. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Fowler, L. L. and McClure, R. D. 1989. Political Ambition: Who Decides to Run for Congress. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Fox, R. L. and Lawless, J. L. 2010. If Only They'd Ask: Gender, Recruitment, and Political Ambition. Journal of Politics 72 (2): 310–26.Google Scholar
Galvin, D. J. 2010. Presidential Party Building. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gerber, A. S. and Green, D. P. 2000. The Effects of Canvassing, Telephone Calls, and Direct Mail on Voter Turnout: A Field Experiment. American Political Science Review 94 (3): 653–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, J. L., Cotter, C. P., Bibby, J. F., and Huckshorn, R. J. 1983. Assessing Party Organizational Strength. American Journal of Political Science 27 (2): 193–222.Google Scholar
Gibson, J. L., Cotter, C. P., Bibby, J. F., and Huckshorn, R. J. 1985. Wither the Local Parties? A Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Analysis of the Strength of Party Organizations. American Journal of Political Science 29 (1): 139–60.Google Scholar
Gilens, M. 2009. Preference Gaps and Inequality in Representation. PS: Political Science and Politics 42 (2): 335–41.Google Scholar
Hacker, J. and Pierson, P. 2005. Off Center. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Hacker, J. S. and Pierson, P. 2010. Winner Take all Politics. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Hall, R. 1996. Participation in Congress. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Helander, V. 1997. Finland. In Passages to Power: Legislative Recruitment in Advanced Democracies, ed. Norris, P.. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 56–75.Google Scholar
Hersh, E. 2012. Persuadable Voters in the Eyes of the Persuaders. Working paper, Yale University, New Haven, CT.Google Scholar
Hertzke, A. D. 1994. Vanishing Candidates in the 2nd District of Colorado. In Who Runs for Congress?, ed. Kazee, T.. Washington, DC: CQ Press, 82–100.Google Scholar
Huckshorn, R. J., and Spencer, R. C. 1971. The Politics of Defeat. Boston, MA: University of Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Jacobson, G. C. 1985. Party Organization and Distribution of Campaign Resources: Republicans and Democrats in (1982). Political Science Quarterly 100 (4): 603–25.Google Scholar
Jacobson, G. C., and Kernell, S. 1983. Strategy and Choice in Congressional Elections. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Jewell, M. E., and Morehouse, S. M. 2000. Political Parties and Elections in the American States. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Kanthak, K. and Woon, J. 2013. Women Don't Run? Election Aversion and Candidate Entry. Working Paper.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kazee, T., and Thornberry, M. C. 1990. Where's the Party? Congressional Candidate Recruitment and American Party Organizations. Western Political Quarterly 43 (1): 61–80.Google Scholar
Kazee, T. 1994. Who Runs for Congress? Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Lawless, J. L. 2012. Becoming a Candidate: Political Ambition and the Decision to Run for Office. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lawless, J. L., and Fox, R. L. 2005. It Takes a Candidate. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Layzell, A. C., and Overby, L. M. 1994. Biding Their Time in the Illinois 9th. In Who runs for Congress?, ed. Kazee, T.. Washington, DC: CQ Press, 150–64.Google Scholar
Leijenaar, M., and Niemoller, K. 1997. The Netherlands. In Passages to Power: Legislative Recruitment in Advanced Democracies, ed. Norris, P.. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 114–36.Google Scholar
Lipset, S. M. 1983. The Congressional Candidate. Journal of Contemporary Studies 6: 87–105.Google Scholar
Lundin, M., Skans, O. N., and Zetterberg, P. 2013. Political Training as a Pathway to Power: The Impact of Participation in Student Union Councils on Candidate Emergence. Working Paper, Uppsala University, Sweden.Google Scholar
Maestas, C. D., Fulton, S., Maisel, L. S., and Stone, W. J. 2006. When to Risk It? Institutions, Ambitions, and the Decision to Run for the US House. American Political Science Review 100 (2): 195–208.Google Scholar
Maisel, L. S. 2001. American Political Parties: Still Central to a Functioning Democracy? In American Political Parties: Decline or Resurgence?, eds. Cohen, J. E., Fleisher, R., and Kantor, P. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Mann, T. E., and Ornstein, N. J. 2012. It's Even Worse Than it Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided with the New Politics of Extremism. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Masket, S. 2007. It Takes an Outsider: Extra Legislative Organization and Partisanship in the California Assembly, 1849–2006. American Journal of Political Science 51 (3): 482–97.Google Scholar
Masket, S. 2009. No Middle Ground. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Masket, S. 2011. The Circus that Wasn't: The Republican Party's Quest for Order in California's 2003 Gubernatorial Recall Election. State Politics & Policy Quarterly 11 (2): 123–47.Google Scholar
Masket, S. E., and Shor, B. 2011. Polarization Without Parties: The Rise of Legislative Partisanship in Nebraska's Unicameral Legislature. Presented at the 2011 Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
McAllister, I. 1997. Australia. In Passages to Power: Legislative Recruitment in Advanced Democracies, ed. Norris, P.. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 15–32.Google Scholar
Mendez, M. 2014. Who Represents the Interests of Undocumented Latinos? A Field Experiment of State Legislators. Working Paper, University of Southern California.Google Scholar
Miller, W., and Stokes, D. 1963. Constituency Influence in Congress. American Political Science Review 57, 45–56.Google Scholar
Moncrief, G. F. 1999. Recruitment and Retention in US Legislatures. Legislative Studies Quarterly 24 (2): 173–208.Google Scholar
Moncrief, G. F., Squire, P., and Jewell, M. E. 2001. Who Runs for the Legislature? Columbus, Ohio: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Niven, D. 1998. The Missing Majority: The Recruitment of Women As State Legislative Candidates. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Preece, J., Bogach, O., and Fisher, R. 2014. Run, Jane, Run! Candidate Training Programs and Women's Recruitment. Working paper, Brigham Young University.Google Scholar
Prewitt, K. 1970. The Recruitment of Political Leaders: A Study of Citizen-Politicians. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
Prewitt, K., and Nowlin, W. 1969. Political Ambitions and the Behavior of Incumbent Politicians. Western Political Quarterly 22 (2): 298–308.Google Scholar
Rallings, C., Thrasher, M., Borisyuk, G., and Shears, M. 2010. Parties, Recruitment and Modernisation: Evidence from Local Election Candidates. Local Government Studies 36 (3): 361–79.Google Scholar
Roback, T. H. 1974. Recruitment and Incentive Patterns Among Grassroots Republican Officials: Continuity and Change in Two States. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Rohde, D. W. 1979. Risk-Bearing and Progressive Ambition: The Case of Members of the United States House of Representatives. American Journal of Political Science 23 (1): 1–26.Google Scholar
Rosenzweig, R. M. 1957. The Politician and Career in Politics. Midwest Journal of Political Science 1 (2): 163–72.Google Scholar
Rozell, M. J. 2000. Helping Women Run and Win: Feminist Groups, Candidate Recruitment and Training. Women & Politics 21 (3): 101–16.Google Scholar
Rozell, M. J., and Wilcox, C. 1996. Second Coming: The Strategies of the New Christian Right. Political Science Quarterly 111 (2): 271–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanbonmatsu, K. 2003. Candidate Recruitment and Women's Election to the State Legislatures. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for American Women and Politics.Google Scholar
Sanbonmatsu, K. 2006a. Where Women Run: Gender and Party in the American States. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Sanbonmatsu, K. 2006b. The Legislative Party and Candidate Recruitment in the American States. Party Politics 12 (2): 233–56.Google Scholar
Sanbonmatsu, K., Carroll, S. J., and Walsh, D. 2009. Poised to Run: Women's Pathways to the State Legislatures. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for American Women and Politics, Rutgers University.Google Scholar
Schlesinger, J. A. 1966. Ambition and Politics. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
Seligman, L. G. 1961. Political Recruitment and Party Structure: A Case Study. American Political Science Review 55: 77–86.Google Scholar
Seligman, L. G., King, M. R., Kim, C. L., and Smith, R. E. 1974. Patterns of Recruitment: A State Chooses Its Lawmakers. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
Siavelis, P., and Morgenstern, S. 2008. Pathways to Power: Political Recruitment and Candidate Selection in Latin America. Philadelphia, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Snowiss, L. M. 1966. Congressional Recruitment and Representation. American Political Science Review 60 (3): 627–39.Google Scholar
Sorauf, F. J. 1963. Party and Representation: Legislative Politics in Pennsylvania. New York, NY: Atherton Press.Google Scholar
Thurber, J. A. 1976. The Impact of Party Recruitment Activity Upon Legislative Role Orientations: A Path Analysis. Legislative Studies Quarterly 1 (4): 533–49.Google Scholar
Van Houweling, R. P. 2013. Parties as Enablers. Manuscript, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Wahlke, J. C., Eulau, H., Buchanan, W., and Ferguson, L. C. 1962. The Legislative System. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
Washington, E. L. 2008. Female Socialization: How Daughters Affect Their Legislator Fathers' Voting on Women's Issues. American Economic Review 98 (1): 311–32.Google Scholar
Watts, T. W. 1968. The Party Organization and Its Activities. In Approaches to the Study of Party Organization, ed. Crotty, W. J.. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 247–306.Google Scholar
Williams, O. P., and Adrian, C. R. 1963. Four Cities: A Study in Comparative Policy Making. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar