LAUSR

Abstract In the modern era of US presidential nominations, every election cycle we witness around 20% change in delegate selection system types. This variance remains unexplained and for the most part unexplored. At the same time, prior formal and empirical models offer contradicting expectations of party leader behavior in their choice of system. This paper looks to bridge this divide. We argue state party leaders use delegate selection systems to select candidates favorable to their own ideological position. When the median partisan is ideologically left relative to the position of state Democratic leaders, the leaders of the Party will open up the delegate selection system to dilute the voices furthest on the left. We employ maximum likelihood estimation as a method to show that left positioning of citizens relative to state Democratic leaders increases the likelihood the state Democratic Party will use a primary system as opposed to a caucus.