| Primary Election | Article View | ||||
| On the File menu, click Print to print the information. | |||||
| II. | The Influence of Primary Elections |
Primaries have greatly changed the character of elections in the United States. Before primaries were widely adopted in the 20th century, powerful state and local party leaders—the so-called political bosses—controlled the selection of nominees at political conventions. The bosses had the power to select delegates to the convention, so they could extract political favors from candidates in exchange for ensuring that delegates would support the candidate. Primary elections reduce the power of party leaders by allowing voters to select nominees directly. The primary system also offers lesser-known candidates a better chance of winning elections than do other nominating systems. In regions or states where one political party dominates, primaries may hold more importance than the general election.
Candidates in a primary election, except those who run unopposed, campaign against candidates from their own party. The primary system thus encourages prospective nominees to publicly oppose the views of competing candidates and focuses attention on the individual candidates instead of the unity of the party.
Critics have pointed out a number of weaknesses in the primary system. One criticism is that primaries place an additional burden on voters, who usually must choose among numerous candidates for the various offices without the guidance of any official endorsement of the party leadership. Another criticism is that primaries have considerably increased the length and expense of political campaigns, since candidates must campaign for and win both the primary election and the general election. In the United States, campaigns typically last many months. In other nations, such as the United Kingdom, campaigns are much shorter, often only a matter of weeks.
Finally, although the primary election has curbed the worst excesses of political bosses and so-called political machines, it has also weakened state party organizations by barring them from performing one of their most powerful functions—the preliminary screening of candidates. Interest groups, business and labor organizations, and the press to some extent have taken over the functions formerly performed by the party leaders.