Break out the mint juleps? Is New Hampshire the "primary" culprit limiting presidential nomination forecasts?

Randall E. Adkins, Andrew J. Dowdle

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

18 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Previous research demonstrated the possibility of forecasting presidential nominations by using the results of public opinion polls and Federal Election Commission records regarding the money presidential candidates raise during the year prior to the election (Mayer, 1996). To improve on these results, the authors incorporate three additional variables into two OLS models. The equations include data for contests from 1976 to 1996 where the incumbent did not sit for reelection. The results of the Mayer model and Model 1, which contain information available prior to the Iowa caucus, are compared to Model 2, which includes New Hampshire primary returns. While public opinion polls and early fundraising are important components of forecasting presidential nominations, cash reserves and regional uniqueness also affect the results. The evidence indicates the New Hampshire primary is the "primary" culprit sabotaging presidential nomination forecasting models from achieving the same degree of accuracy as the general election counterparts.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)251-269
Number of pages19
JournalAmerican Politics Research
Volume28
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2000

Fingerprint

opinion poll
election
public opinion
fundraising
available information
money
candidacy
evidence

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

Break out the mint juleps? Is New Hampshire the "primary" culprit limiting presidential nomination forecasts? / Adkins, Randall E.; Dowdle, Andrew J.

In: American Politics Research, Vol. 28, No. 2, 04.2000, p. 251-269.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{dc20a6fca2944e42b0180d2bd772a65c,
title = "Break out the mint juleps? Is New Hampshire the {"}primary{"} culprit limiting presidential nomination forecasts?",
abstract = "Previous research demonstrated the possibility of forecasting presidential nominations by using the results of public opinion polls and Federal Election Commission records regarding the money presidential candidates raise during the year prior to the election (Mayer, 1996). To improve on these results, the authors incorporate three additional variables into two OLS models. The equations include data for contests from 1976 to 1996 where the incumbent did not sit for reelection. The results of the Mayer model and Model 1, which contain information available prior to the Iowa caucus, are compared to Model 2, which includes New Hampshire primary returns. While public opinion polls and early fundraising are important components of forecasting presidential nominations, cash reserves and regional uniqueness also affect the results. The evidence indicates the New Hampshire primary is the {"}primary{"} culprit sabotaging presidential nomination forecasting models from achieving the same degree of accuracy as the general election counterparts.",
author = "Adkins, {Randall E.} and Dowdle, {Andrew J.}",
year = "2000",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1177/1532673X00028002006",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "28",
pages = "251--269",
journal = "American Politics Research",
issn = "1532-673X",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Break out the mint juleps? Is New Hampshire the "primary" culprit limiting presidential nomination forecasts?

AU - Adkins, Randall E.

AU - Dowdle, Andrew J.

PY - 2000/4

Y1 - 2000/4

N2 - Previous research demonstrated the possibility of forecasting presidential nominations by using the results of public opinion polls and Federal Election Commission records regarding the money presidential candidates raise during the year prior to the election (Mayer, 1996). To improve on these results, the authors incorporate three additional variables into two OLS models. The equations include data for contests from 1976 to 1996 where the incumbent did not sit for reelection. The results of the Mayer model and Model 1, which contain information available prior to the Iowa caucus, are compared to Model 2, which includes New Hampshire primary returns. While public opinion polls and early fundraising are important components of forecasting presidential nominations, cash reserves and regional uniqueness also affect the results. The evidence indicates the New Hampshire primary is the "primary" culprit sabotaging presidential nomination forecasting models from achieving the same degree of accuracy as the general election counterparts.

AB - Previous research demonstrated the possibility of forecasting presidential nominations by using the results of public opinion polls and Federal Election Commission records regarding the money presidential candidates raise during the year prior to the election (Mayer, 1996). To improve on these results, the authors incorporate three additional variables into two OLS models. The equations include data for contests from 1976 to 1996 where the incumbent did not sit for reelection. The results of the Mayer model and Model 1, which contain information available prior to the Iowa caucus, are compared to Model 2, which includes New Hampshire primary returns. While public opinion polls and early fundraising are important components of forecasting presidential nominations, cash reserves and regional uniqueness also affect the results. The evidence indicates the New Hampshire primary is the "primary" culprit sabotaging presidential nomination forecasting models from achieving the same degree of accuracy as the general election counterparts.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0037755943&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0037755943&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1532673X00028002006

DO - 10.1177/1532673X00028002006

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0037755943

VL - 28

SP - 251

EP - 269

JO - American Politics Research

JF - American Politics Research

SN - 1532-673X

IS - 2

ER -