In Arizona’s Senate race, a long-term incumbent faces a rising national tide.

John McCain has been one of the Grand Canyon state’s US Senators for nearly three decades. But will he be dragged out of office by Donald Trump’s falling national popularity? As part of our series covering key Senate races in the 2016 election Barbara Norrander writes that in the Arizona race, McCain’s challenger, Ann Kirkpatrick – though behind in the polls – could benefit if Republicans are unwilling to vote for Donald Trump stay at home in November or if there is a surge in Latino voters

In Arizona’s nasty, hard-fought 2018 Senate race, it’s all going to come down to turnout

Out of 35 US Senate elections this year, Arizona’s is one of only three without an incumbent. Barbara Norrander and Lisa Sanchez write that the contest between US House Representatives Republican Martha McSally and Democrat Krysten Sinema is a close and hard fought one, with both going negative in their campaigns. While this negativity may energize both party’s respective bases, they argue that it may turn off independent voters – a group both candidates need if they want to head to Washington DC in January 2019

Super Tuesday: Regional Politics and Presidential Primaries

Super Tuesday 1988 was the first successful attempt to get several states in one region to hold their presidential primaries on the same day. Its success—or lack thereof— will affect the way presidents are elected for many years to come. Reaching beyond Super Tuesday and the nominations of George Bush and Michael Dukakis, Barbara Norrander\u27s book presents the nation\u27s first regional primary as the latest chapter in the ever-changing system through which U.S. political parties choose their presidential candidates. Norrander\u27s research details how changes in technology, candidate and media strategies, and historical circumstances have influenced recent presidential nominations and how they set the stage for the South\u27s primary in 1988. Super Tuesday: Regional Politics and Presidential Primaries emerges as an authoritative source not only on Super Tuesday but on many other aspects of presidential nominations. This book demonstrates that much of current conventional wisdom about presidential nominations is wrong. Norrander traces candidate strategies from 1976 to 1988 and calculates turnout rates from 1960 to 1988. She also examines the composition of the Super Tuesday electorate with respect both to preconceived notions of who participates in presidential primaries and to deliberate attempts by the Democratic and Republican parties to manipulate voter turnout in the South\u27s regional primary. Her analysis of the timing and process of nomination victories from 1976 to 1988 emphasizes the importance of the overlooked role of candidate attrition over candidate momentum. Of special interest to political scientists—and to political observers—concerned with parties, elections, and voting behavior, Norrander\u27s book will reshape the ex-amination of presidential contests in 1992 and beyond. Barbara Norrander is associate professor of political science at the University of Arizona. More than a simple history of a one-day event . . . a detailed empirical analysis of both the 1988 struggle and presidential primary elections in general. —Choicehttps://uknowledge.uky.edu/upk_political_science_american_politics/1032/thumbnail.jp

Open Versus Closed Primaries and the Ideological Composition of Presidential Primary Electorates

Many journalists, political reformers and social scientists assume that electorates in open versus closed primaries are distinctive, especially in terms of their ideological orientations. Because voting in closed primaries is restricted to registered partisans, voters in this setting are assumed to be more ideologically extreme. Independents voting in open primaries are seen as moderating the ideological orientation of these primary electorates. However, our research demonstrates that the ideological orientations of voters in these two primary settings are quite similar. Prior research demonstrates the influence of primary laws on voters’ self-identifications as partisans or independents. We expand upon this research to show how this influences the number and ideological positions of partisans and independents as they vote in presidential primaries held under differing participation rules