IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v80y1986i04p1291-1304_18.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Heavy Turnout Help Democrats in Presidential Elections?

Author

Listed:
  • Tucker, Harvey J.
  • Arnold Vedlitz,
  • DeNardo, James

Abstract

There is conventional political wisdom that high voter turnout in a U.S. presidential election advantages the majority party. Because the Democratic party has been the dominant party in recent decades, this turnout advantage is often believed to accrue to Democratic presidential candidates. In an article in the June 1980 issue of the Review, James DeNardo challenged this conventional view. Indeed, he claimed that the majority party was likely to suffer with increased turnout when the behavior of core and peripheral voters is taken into account. Harvey J. Tucker and Arnold Vedlitz take issue with DeNardo's reasoning and evidence, and DeNardo embellishes and underscores his original case.

Suggested Citation

  • Tucker, Harvey J. & Arnold Vedlitz, & DeNardo, James, 1986. "Does Heavy Turnout Help Democrats in Presidential Elections?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(4), pages 1291-1304, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:80:y:1986:i:04:p:1291-1304_18
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055400185119/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bernard Grofman, 1998. "Rebuttal to Wuffle and Collet's Supposedly Irrefutable Evidence that Higher Turnout Benefits Republicans," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 10(2), pages 251-255, April.
    2. Amihai Glazer & Bernard Grofman, 1992. "A positive correlation between turnout and plurality does not refute the rational voter model," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 85-93, February.
    3. Knack, Stephen, 1997. "The reappearing American voter why did turnout rise in '92?," MPRA Paper 27250, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Rowe, Kelly & Lago, Ignacio & Lago-Peñas, Santiago, 2012. "The Partisan Consequences of Turnout Revisited," MPRA Paper 45423, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Martins, Rodrigo & Veiga, Francisco José, 2014. "Does voter turnout affect the votes for the incumbent government?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 274-286.
    6. Alessandro Sforza, 2014. "The Weather Effect: estimating the effect of voter turnout on electoral outcomes in Italy," Working Papers w201405, Banco de Portugal, Economics and Research Department.
    7. Christine Fauvelle-Aymar & Abel François, 2018. "Place of registration and place of residence: the non-linear detrimental impact of transportation cost on electoral participation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(3), pages 405-440, September.
    8. Martins, Rodrigo & Veiga, Francisco José, 2014. "Does voter turnout affect the votes for the incumbent government?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 274-286.
    9. Stefan Krasa & Mattias Polborn, 2014. "Policy Divergence and Voter Polarization in a Structural Model of Elections," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 57(1), pages 31-76.
    10. A Wuffle & Christian Collet, 1997. "Why Democrats Shouldn't Vote (With Acknowledgements to R. Erikson)," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 9(1), pages 137-140, January.
    11. Christine Fauvelle-Aymar & Abel François, 2003. "Campagne électorale, préférences politiques et participation. Une étude empirique sur les élections législatives françaises de 1997," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques j04009, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    12. John E. Mcnulty, 2005. "Phone-Based GOTV—What’s on the Line? Field Experiments with Varied Partisan Components, 2002-2003," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 601(1), pages 41-65, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:80:y:1986:i:04:p:1291-1304_18. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.