The 2008 U.S. presidential campaign has provided a lifetime's worth of surprises. Once again, however, the nomination process highlighted the importance of organization, political prowess, timing, and money. And once again, it raised many hackles. The Democratic contest in particular generated many complaints—for example, it started too early, it was too long, and Super Tuesday was overloaded. This timely book synthesizes new analysis by premier political scientists into a cohesive look at the presidential nomination process—the ways in which it is broken and how it might be fixed. The contributors to Reforming the Presidential Nomination Process address different facets of the selection process, starting with a brief history of how we got to this point. They analyze the importance—and perceived unfairness—of the earliest primaries and discuss what led to record turnouts in 2008. What roles do media coverage and public endorsements play? William Mayer explains the "superdelegate" phenomenon and the controversy surrounding it; James Gibson and Melanie Springer evaluate public perceptions of the current process as well as possible reforms. Larry Sabato (A More Perfect Constitution) calls for a new nomination system, installed via constitutional amendment, while Tom Mann of Brookings opines on calls for reform that arose in 2008 and Daniel Lowenstein examines the process by which reforms may be adopted—or blocked.

The 2020 presidential selection process is already underway. As the political parties finalize their nominating rules and the states jostle for an advantageous contest date, potential challengers are being identified and sized up by party insiders. Once again, media and popular attention will be disproportionately focused on the candidates’ performance in the first and earliest of the state nominating contests—and on how quickly the sequence of primaries and caucuses winnows the field and identifies the presumptive nominees. But what are the implications of a sequential and front-loaded nominating calendar that gives some voters outsized influence while leaving many others with a constrained choice—or no choice—in the selection of their party’s presidential nominee? Reforming the Presidential Nominating Process: Front-Loading's Consequences and the National Primary Solution critiques the contemporary nominating process from the perspective of voters and their right to effectively participate in their parties’ selection of a presidential nominee. Employing both a common-sense and legal, rights-based framework to invite a constitutionally grounded conversation on the legitimacy of the current presidential nominating process, Lisa K. Parshall argues that timing of participation in the nomination goes hand-in-hand with the right to choose a candidate and the fairest way to restore the promise of meaningful and timely participation for all voters is by adopting a same-day national primary. Viewed from the party membership perspective, this work illuminates the fundamental interests at stake that should be considered in any potential reform of the presidential nominating system.

Seeks to understand and explain the behavior of party elites during the 2008 Democratic Party presidential race. What is the dominant force in presidential nomination campaigns? Are nomination outcomes decided largely by the political party or by the candidates and their activities? In Strategic Decision-Making in Presidential Nominations, Kenny J. Whitby aims to provide some answers to these important questions, focusing on the closely contested 2008 race between Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. It was this race that spotlighted the role played by “superdelegates,” the unpledged party elites who were added to the nomination process in the 1980s. Whitby’s central argument is that superdelegates are strategic actors and their endorsements are a response to a variety of demographic, institutional, and campaign factors. While some weigh in early with an endorsement, many adopt a wait-and-see approach. Using a novel framework generally known as survival analysis, Whitby provides us with a method for understanding when and why party elites decide to chime in on their presidential nomination campaign.

The race for the White House may seem like a marathon, but the nomination process is becoming a sprint, with the starting gun fired earlier each time. Where state primaries and caucuses were once spread out over a period of three or four months, most are now crammed into a four– or five–week interval at the very beginning of the delegate selection calendar. The compression and hastening of the nomination season are changing the nature of the presidential selection process, the most visible pillar of American democracy. Despite the importance of this issue in American politics, however, too little systematic analysis has been done on the topic. This is the first book to offer a comprehensive examination of the front-loading problem in all its facets. William Mayer and Andrew Busch define the parameters of the front-loading question as well as its impact. They trace the history that shaped the current system and explain why it is such a critical element of presidential elections. Most important, the authors present a detailed analysis of all the major proposals for coping with front-loading and of the political and constitutional obstacles for reform. While they conclude that there is no easy solution to this complex issue, they identify a general direction for reform efforts. They also feel that the political parties should be the prime movers in formulating and implementing changes.

Leading scholars examine the law governing the American presidential nomination process and offer practical ideas for reform.

The race that's run before the one for President--that's the money primary. But more than money must be acquired in the early campaign for President. What's often just as important in securing candidate viability and success is the media coverage garnered during this time, since this is frequently the first decisive test of a candidate's presidential strength. The election years of 1988 and 2000 stand out among recent presidential nomination campaigns because they were two elections in which both major parties had open nomination contests. In this book, Michael J. Goff looks at the pre-candidacy and early candidacy periods of each of these election cycles and the decisive impact that the money primary had on both. His study confirms the pivotal importance of money and media coverage in a successful nomination bid and suggests the advent of yet a new period in the ever-evolving system of presidential selection. Visit our website for sample chapters!

Presenting a range of essays from top scholars in the field, this reader helps students to understand how American Government institutions can be made to work better.

A thorough examination of the people, forces, and events that have shaped the right, opportunity, and value of the vote in America from 1715 to the present. Despite the successful struggles of women, blacks, soldiers, and other minorities to secure suffrage, voter turnout in America is among the lowest in westernized countries. Voting in America: A Reference Handbook surveys the history of voting, examining how it has evolved since Colonial times. This book focuses on how various legal, constitutional, and social barriers such as the Voter Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act, the Motor Voter Act, and the 23rd Amendment have impacted the right to vote. It also focuses on what controversies, such as the two-party monopoly and financial influence, still remain. The only book to consider the rise in voting opportunities for Americans also explores factors affecting the value of the vote, such as redistricting, term limits, and low voter turnout.

The 2012 election is over, but the debate over the fairness and accuracy of our electoral system continues. The courts are dealing with the alleged discriminatory impact of voter ID requirements on minority voters; privacy and vote manipulation are concerns as political campaigns utilize new technology to target voters; the news media are contending with harsh public criticism of their elections coverage; the campaign finance floodgates were opened with vast resources spent on negative advertising; and the Electoral College continues to undermine a national, democratic electoral system—Is this any way to run a democratic election? This fully updated fifth edition answers that important question by looking at both recent events and recent scholarship focused on the democratic electoral process, including new data and timely illustrations from the 2012 elections.