Search results

One of the most relevant aspects of party democratization is the consequence of more inclusive methods of candidate selection, and particularly of primaries, for party competition. Despite its relevance, and contrary to the attention it has received in the US, the electoral consequences of primaries have rarely been analysed in Europe. This article assesses whether the use of one member one vote (OMOV) primaries for candidate selection affects the electoral result of the party and, if it does, in what direction. The article contributes to our still limited knowledge of this aspect of European party politics with an analysis of the use of closed party primaries by the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party (PSOE) and their effects on its electoral performance in local elections. With an analysis of the electoral performance of the PSOE in municipalities of 10,000 inhabitants or more for the 1999, 2003, 2007 and 2011 local elections, the article shows that OMOV primaries have, overall, positive electoral payoffs but also that their effects can vary.

Die Kandidatenaufstellung stellt einen erheblichen Teil des Wahlverfahrens dar und ist von zentraler Bedeutung für die Zusammensetzung des Parlaments. Gegenstand der Untersuchung ist ein Rechtsvergleich der Kandidatenaufstellung in Deutschland, USA und Frankreich. Der Autor zeigt die zentrale Rolle der Parteien bei der Kandidatenaufstellung zum Bundestag auf, die den direkten Einfluss des Wählers relativiert und verfassungsrechtliche Probleme aufwirft. Dabei bezieht er das neue Bundestagswahlrecht (2013) mit ein. Er untersucht die Vorwahl («Primary») im US-amerikanischen Wahlsystem, zeigt neue Entwicklungen in Frankreich auf und diskutiert, welche Reformschritte im deutschen Recht verfassungsrechtlich zulässig wären und welche sich als verfassungsrechtlich problematisch erweisen

For years, political scholars and pundits have claimed that primary elections are exacerbating polarization and with the 2022 midterm elections approaching this year has been no different. With many extremist candidates on both sides of the aisle, it certainly feels like this claim should be true, but does the political science back that up?

To find an answer we turn to Harvard political scientist James Snyder and his 2010 paper "Primary Elections and Partisan Polarization in the U.S. Congress". The findings are surprising and may have some key insights for how we should think about primary elections in the U.S.