Political Networks and Primary Elections
The scholarship on political parties has largely focused on their declining influence. Specifically, many claim that through the widespread adoption of the partisan primary, control over the nomination of candidates has been largely relegated to the ambitions and talents of the office-seekers themselves. In my dissertation, I challenge this perspective, arguing that networks of partisan interests still play a major role in determining a party’s nominee. To support this claim, I combine field interviews, journalistic accounts, election results, and campaign finance disclosures to demonstrate the systematic elect of political networks on the electoral prospects of primary candidates. I provide a series of case studies to show the impact of party networks and to demonstrate the underlying mechanism – the diverse campaign resources that these networks are able to marshal on behalf of their candidates. To generalize these findings, I use campaign finance data for candidates between 1980 and 2014 to construct a novel measure of group support – existing network density – derived from the degree of coordination present among a candidate’s campaign contributors. I find that greater network support provides a significant benefit to candidates seeking consequential open-seat nominations for the House of Representatives. These effects remain over time and across parties after controlling for measures of candidate viability, such as fundraising and previous elected experience. This suggests that while the party organizations may have fewer formal powers over the selection of candidates for office, the constellation of organized interests constituting these political parties have lost little of their clout in the electoral process.
Table of Contents
 Chapter 1: Introduction
 Chapter 2: Primary Elections and Political Parties
 Chapter 3: Networks on the Ground
 Chapter 4: Measuring Group Support
 Chapter 5: Clearing the Field
 Chapter 6: Winning the Nomination
 Chapter 7: Conclusion
 “Effect of Party Networks on Congressional Primaries.” Presented at APSA 2019; MPSA 2019.
 "We Don't Want Nobody Nobody Sent: Party Network Influence in Primary Nominations.'' Presented at MPSA 2018.
 "Dividing the Dollars: Contribution Networks and Political Polarization." Presented at MPSA 2017.
Appendix Materials for Job Paper
Parties on the Ground
A holistic approach to the study of House Nominations during the 2014 primary election cycle. Co-authored with Kathleen Bawn, Knox Brown, Angela Ocampo, John Ray, and John Zaller.
 “Policy Voting in House Primaries.” 2019. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties. Accepted. (with Kathleen Bawn, Stephanie DeMora, Andrew Dowdle, and Spencer Hall)
 Parties on the Ground: A Study of Nominations to the U.S. House of Representatives. In progress.
 "He Who Can Make Nominations is the Owner of the Party." 2015. Presented at APSA 2015.
 "Social Choice and Coordination Problems in Open House Primaries." 2015. Presented at APSA 2015.
 "Parties on the Ground: A Preliminary Report on Open Seat Nominations." 2014. Presented at APSA 2014.
From polarization to inequality, from corruption to prejudice, reforms to the political process are often presented as cures to many societal shortcomings. These policies, however, usually have unintended consequences ignored by reformers and the evidence of their effectiveness is often lacking. For example, the Top-Two Primary system in California was proposed to help alleviate polarization. In one paper  based on simulations and survey data, I show that these voting methods are unlikely to moderate outcomes and have the unintended consequence of decreasing voter turnout.
 "Electoral Reform and Political Polarization: A Simulation-Based Look at the Top-Two Primary." Presented at MPSA 2018.
 “Parties, Agendas, and Roll Rates.” 2019. Journal of Theoretical Politics. R&R. (with Thomas Schwartz)