Case Studies: How Primary Campaigns Have Helped Polarize Politics

Background

At the turn of the twentieth century, a movement known as progressivism began to gain influence in American politics. The Progressives were reformers who believed that politics under the Constitution were too messy and controlled by special interests. They believed that party bosses who controlled political machines and organizations were corrupt and out to enrich themselves. The reformers sought more efficient government that was democratic and responsible to the people.

Among the several reforms Progressives passed at different levels, the primary election was one of the most significant electoral reforms for the future of political parties. Primaries gave voters the power to decide who would be their party’s nominee for presidential and other elections. Through the primary system, progressive reformers undermined the power of the party bosses who supposedly made shady deals in cigar-smoke-filled rooms. While this was sometimes true, party leaders also had played an important role in selecting candidates who would represent the party faithfully, provide geographic balance, and were generally more moderate to appeal to a broad electorate to win elections.

During the Progressive era, most states adopted primaries. Currently, Democrats hold primaries in 47 states, and Republicans hold primaries in 43 states. The remaining states hold caucuses, which are large meetings where registered members of a party meet to discuss and then select their preferred candidate. Primaries can be open to all registered voters, closed to registered party members only, or semi-open to party members and independents. The Republicans have a winner-take-all system, and the Democrats have a more complicated formula. Primaries are important because delegates vote for, and thereby pledge to support, certain candidates, and the candidate who reaches a certain number will be guaranteed the nomination.

Mass media plays a very important role in shaping popular responses to early primaries in states like New Hampshire that determine campaign momentum and affect fundraising. “Super Tuesday” is a day when several primaries occur and has been given a great deal of symbolic weight to who will win the nomination. “Super Tuesday” has caused states to compete to set their primary elections earlier, so that they can gain greater influence in determining who will win the nomination. But in both parties, a candidate can be selected as the presidential nominee by winning a majority of delegates.

The primary system has had consequences for parties. Voters have generally followed and been attracted to individual candidates rather than their party. Candidates have learned to present strong appeals to ideologically committed and extreme party members during the primary elections. Candidates craft their image to appeal to their most committed followers and donors with a shared outlook on social media, which has the effect of amplifying the loudest and most extreme voices in each party. They tend to be those most willing to denounce and insult the other party, to divide the country into warring camps, and those willing to tell their party’s base that they are the victims of conspiracies perpetrated by corrupt elites. Demagogues reject the civic virtues of moderation, compromise, and respect essential for self-governance.

Howard Dean 2004  

In running for the Democratic Party’s nomination in 2004, Howard Dean tapped into the Internet to build a state-of-the-art website for fundraising and chat forums to create opportunities for followers to share their common ideas. In his pointed criticisms of the Republican Party and the Iraq War, Dean’s campaign energized the progressive, antiwar faction of the party. His appeal attempted to shift the party to the left. These activists wanted the party to stop making policy compromises with Republicans and to be more ideologically pure. They reinforced each other’s views and rarely heard opposing views in their chatrooms. While Dean ultimately lost the nomination, he helped build a base that pushed the Democratic Party to the left.

Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, 2016  

In the 2016 Democratic primary race, Hillary Clinton was seen as the candidate of party regulars, while Bernie Sanders was an insurgent, Democratic-Socialist candidate who represented younger, more progressive voters who were angry about capitalism. Sanders won several important primaries in the heated, close race, and Clinton threatened to employ superdelegates made up of party officials who were not regular primary delegates. Superdelegates comprise about 15 percent of the delegates who attend the Democratic National Convention and are not bound to support any particular candidate. The number of primary voters who identified themselves as ideologically “liberal” had increased from 47 percent in 2012 to 61 percent in 2016. With Sanders’ strong appeal to these voters, Clinton moved in Sanders’s direction on many issues in the primaries. Clinton eventually triumphed among regular delegates during the primaries and became the party nominee, but the ideological character of the party was impacted.

Donald Trump, 2016 

During the Barack Obama presidency, many insurgent Tea Party members and working-class populists, who felt like victims of the effects of globalization, opposed his policies and were frustrated with the more moderate candidacy of Mitt Romney in 2012. In 2016, Donald Trump was able to appeal to this large, disaffected segment, which included many of his dedicated followers on social media, especially Twitter. Trump attacked the Republican Party even as he ran for that party’s nomination and promised to “drain the swamp” with his anti-Washington, D.C., message. He won the party nomination during the primaries as he overwhelmed the other contenders. After his victory in 2016, Trump continued to use Twitter as a tool to govern the country as a movement leader and celebrity among his followers that called traditional political parties into question. As a result, the Republican Party has become increasingly fractured over the internal struggle to control the direction of the party.