Why Voters May Have Failed to Reward Proximate Candidates in the 2012 Top Two Primary

2015/01/01 by Douglas J. Ahler, Jack Citrin, Gabriel Lenz · 2 citations
Social Sciences · #Electoral Systems and Political Participation #Social Media and Politics #Populism, Right-Wing Movements

paper · pdf · doi:10.5070/p2cjpp7125448

openalex publication_date 2015/01/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/27

Abstract

An experiment conducted by the authors (2014) found that the top-two primary first used in California in June 2012 failed to achieve its sponsors’ goal of helping ideologically moderate candidates win. This paper explores why. A primary reason is that voters are largely ignorant about the ideological orientation of candidates, including the moderates they would choose if proximity voting prevailed. We document this in congressional races, focusing on competitive contests with viable moderate candidates. Our results have a straightforward implication: for the top-two primary to mitigate polarization, moderate congressional candidates would have to inform voters about their moderation to a far greater degree.

Citations

• Leapfrog Representation and Extremism: A Study of American Voters and Their Members in Congress
• Advantages and Disadvantages of Cognitive Heuristics in Political Decision Making

Cited by

• Some General Consequences of California's Top-Two Primary System
• Nonpartisan primary [wikipedia]

Related

• Do Open Primaries Improve Representation? An Experimental Test of California's 2012 Top‐Two Primary
• Primary Elections and Candidate Ideology: Out of Step with the Primary Electorate?
• Some General Consequences of California's Top-Two Primary System
• Voter Behavior in California’s Top Two Primary
• A Primary Cause of Partisanship? Nomination Systems and Legislator Ideology