Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
10 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
why Iowa?: by Redlawsk, Tolbert, and Donovan |
Iowans say that caucuses are an example of a grassroots democracy but others say they are unrepresentative. Basically gives a history overview of the Iowa caucuses. |
|
|
The Iowa Caucuses 1972-2008: A Eulogy by Peverill Squire |
Iowa has never selected the final nominee for the party...so it doesnt pick presidents. some argue that it is important for the economcy but it only made up .08% of the state's overall economy and people dont have a very goot understanding of how little impact the Iowa caucuses have |
|
|
Still part of the Conversation: Iowa and NH's say within the Invisible Primary: Christenson, Smidt |
They argue that existing literature underestimates the central roles of IA and NH. they prove that polls within IA and NH have more consistent influence on candidates levels of national news coverage and national polling |
|
|
First in the Nation: NH's changing Electorate: Johnson, Scala, Smith |
focus on myths about NH's electorate. show that it is a very mobile population and most lived somewhere else in 2008. young voters differ from migrant and established voters in the fact that they are more likely to be independent of democrat. Participation in democratic primaries has doubled, so the voter base is more diverse. |
|
|
The New Hampshire effect in Presidential Nominations: Steger, Dowdle, Atkins |
reform inteh early 1970s shifted nomination power away from party elites and frontloaded primary shedules force candidates to raise money earlier. They argue that NH has a statistically significant impact on the predictablility of who will be teh nominee but the Iowa caucuess dont. because their is a huge benefit to performing better than expected. they can expect a large influx of money with out spending much to campain |
|
|
Happenstance and Reforms: norrander |
two levels of presidential nominating process: national legal contest between competing candidates and the legal component. Went from congressional caucuses to primaries |
|
|
Presidential Nomination Politics at the Dawn of the 21st century: Norrander |
4 types of contests, frontrunner, front runner falters, no clear frontrunner, sitting president successfully gains nomination. |
|
|
Choosing Presidential Candidates :Smith and Springer |
reforms began in 1970 because of the 1968 convention. Reasons for refomr were decline in local parites, emergence of TV and more technology and money these changes will always be a challenge to any set of rules but parties are still best equipped to reform the process |
|
|
reforming the reforms revisisted: by William G. Mayer |
Super delegates have had less impact on nominees than people thought. the last person to be affected by it was Walter Mondale in 1984. in other parts of the world political activity is soley the party's decision so it makes sense that the party decides. 2008 was a test of the super delegates but they didnt make enough of a difference to abolish them |
|
|
Rules and the Ideological character of the Primary electorate: Gerald C. Write |
2008 was a messy process with Front loading and delegates. measures that make participation more demanding such as caucuses restrict certain participants and create a more extreme ideological pool. Conclusion also is that rules matter, and reforms give party leaders a bigger say in choosing their nominee. Also states that are earlier end up being more ideological |
