Progressive Ambition: What About the People?
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
PROGRESSIVE AMBITION: WHAT ABOUT THE PEOPLE? by Christopher A. Harper, B.A., M.A. A Dissertation In POLITICAL SCIENCE Submitted to the Graduate Faculty Of Texas Tech University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Approved Dr. Timothy Nokken (Chair of the Committee) Dr. Gregg Murray Dr. Mark McKenzie Peggy Gordon Miller Dean of the Graduate School December, 2011 © 2011 Christopher A. Harper Texas Tech University, Christopher A. Harper, December 2011 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Successfully completing my dissertation is a surreal accomplishment that would not have been made possible without the aid of many people. First and foremost, I’d like to thank my parents for their unconditional love and support. Words cannot describe how blessed I am to have them as such wonderful, positive influences in my life. My incredibly altruistic mother, Ellen, served as a constant source of inspiration throughout my education while my father, Bobby, always helped push me beyond my own perceived limits. I am fortunate to have been mentored by an exceptional committee. I’d like to thank my principle advisor, Timothy Nokken, for his continuous support and superb feedback over the course of this entire project. He was the first person to encourage my exploration of progressive ambition and was always willing to take time to answer any questions I had along the journey. I am also deeply indebted to another committee member, Gregg Murray. He was extremely helpful throughout the entire process but especially with the development of my experimental design. Without his assistance, I would not have been able to conduct my survey research with jury pool subjects. Finally, I’d like to thank my third committee member, Mark McKenzie, for all his prudent suggestions and open door policy over the years. I am forever appreciative to Texas Tech University’s Political Science Department for supporting me throughout graduate school. Without their financial assistance, this tremendous scholarly achievement would not have been possible. Several ii Texas Tech University, Christopher A. Harper, December 2011 other professors, most notably Frank Thames, Dennis Patterson, and Larry Mayer, also offered invaluable wisdom during the course of my tenure that will stay with me beyond the classroom. Moreover, I would be remiss if I did not take time to thank Dora Rodriguez too for all her unheralded administrative assistance which made life less stressful. I am lucky to have been surrounded by a great group of fellow graduate students. When times got tough, our camaraderie strengthened my resolve to complete the challenging nature of this process. A few friends went above and beyond the call of duty and warrant special recognition. Stephen Coventry was always willing to brainstorm ideas and on multiple occasions assisted in data collection. Ryan Rebe shared excellent methods-related advice whenever approached. Lance Hunter also offered insight on several occasions. Finally, I owe a special thanks to two individuals. Sean Theriault generously offered his time and expertise on numerous occasions throughout the graduate school application process. Lauren Otto provided both a steady stream of encouragement and spent countless hours assisting me in data collection to help expedite the completion of this project. iii Texas Tech University, Christopher A. Harper, December 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………………ii LIST OF TABLES………………………………………………………………….vii ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………vi CHAPTER ONE – INTRODUCTION……………………………………………..1 The Birth of “Progressive” Ambition .................................................................................... 3 Research Question ................................................................................................................. 4 My Contribution .................................................................................................................... 5 Dissertation Overview ........................................................................................................... 6 CHAPTER TWO – LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORY………………….9 Why Ambition Matters .......................................................................................................... 9 Progressive Ambition........................................................................................................... 11 Candidate Evaluation ........................................................................................................... 16 Theory & Hypotheses .......................................................................................................... 21 Measuring Ambition ............................................................................................................ 29 Chapter Summary ................................................................................................................ 31 CHAPTER THREE – REAL CANDIDATE ANALYSES………………………34 Presidential Ambition .......................................................................................................... 35 Senatorial Ambition ............................................................................................................. 38 Data and Methods ................................................................................................................ 39 Bivariate Analyses ............................................................................................................... 42 Multivariate Analyses .......................................................................................................... 52 Implications ......................................................................................................................... 55 Chapter Summary ................................................................................................................ 58 CHAPTER FOUR – EXPERIMENTAL CANDIDATE ANALYSES…………..61 Why Experiments................................................................................................................. 62 Data & Methods ................................................................................................................... 65 iv Texas Tech University, Christopher A. Harper, December 2011 Operationalization ................................................................................................................ 69 Bivariate Analyses ............................................................................................................... 73 Multivariate Analyses .......................................................................................................... 79 Implications ......................................................................................................................... 98 Chapter Summary .............................................................................................................. 106 CHAPTER FIVE – CONCLUSION……………………………………………..109 Review of Empirical Findings ........................................................................................... 111 Impact on the Discipline .................................................................................................... 113 Future Research ................................................................................................................. 114 REFERENCES……………………………………………………………….……118 APPENDIX A……………………………………………………………………...133 APPENDIX B……………………………………………………………………...135 APPENDIX C……………………………………………………………………...143 v Texas Tech University, Christopher A. Harper, December 2011 ABSTRACT Over the last several decades, scholars studying progressive ambition have almost exclusively directed their attention towards determining what factors contribute to politicians running for higher office. However, this extensive body of research only tells half of the story. A unique, yet vitally important aspect in the development of political ambition also affects the final electoral outcome. What previous scholars have overlooked is that, ultimately, voters decide the fate of politicians, not the politicians themselves. Candidates can have all the ambition in the world, take the necessary preliminary actions, make the right decisions and run at exactly the right time but whether they win or lose is contingent entirely upon the minds of voters. Therefore, an important unresolved gap in the literature appears to be how the public perceives progressive ambition. Utilizing a methodological mix of actual voting data and experimental research, my dissertation aims to provide groundbreaking theoretical insight on the research question: what effect does progressive ambition, if any, have on voter preferences? vi Texas Tech University, Christopher A. Harper, December 2011 LIST OF TABLES CHAPTER 3 3.1: Two-Party Vote Share for Ambitious vs. Non-Ambitious Candidates (Direction)………………………………………………………………………………..46 3.2: Two-Party Vote Share for Ambitious vs. Non-Ambitious Candidates (Magnitude)..……………………………………………………………………………..47 3.3: Two-Party Vote Share Changes for Ambitious Candidates Based on Tenure……...49 3.4: Challenger Quality – Ambitious vs. Non-Ambitious Candidates……………….…..53 3.5: Difference in Means Test Results – Ambitious vs. Non-Ambitious Candidates……54 3.6: Cross-Sectional Time Series Progressive Ambition Model (OLS Estimates with Fixed Effects)………………………………….………………………………………...57 CHAPTER 4 4.1: Descriptive Statistics for Students……..……………………….…………………...75 4.2: Descriptive Statistics