Partisan Mobilization Campaigns in the Field: Results from a Statewide Turnout Experiment in Michigan

Political parties have recently rediscovered grassroots tactics for voter mobilization. The only solid evidence for the effectiveness of such get-out-the-vote (GOTV) tactics is based upon non-partisan field experiments that may not accurately capture the effectiveness of partisan campaign outreach. In order to address this lacuna, during the 2002 Michigan gubernatorial election, a large field experiment across 14 state house districts evaluated the cost effectiveness of three mobilization technologies utilized by the Michigan Democratic Party’s Youth Coordinated Campaign: door hangers, volunteer phone calls, and face-to-face visits. Contrary to past non-partisan experiments, our results indicate that all three GOTV strategies possess similar cost-effectiveness.

[1]  David W. Nickerson.  Hunting the Elusive Young Voter , 2006 .

[2]  David W. Nickerson.  Volunteer Phone Calls Can Increase Turnout , 2006 .

[3]  David W. Nickerson.  Scalable Protocols Offer Efficient Design for Field Experiments , 2005, Political Analysis.

[4]  Donald P. Green,et al.  Partisan Mail and Voter Turnout: Results From Randomized Field Experiments , 2003 .

[5]  Peter W. Wielhouwer.  In Search of Lincoln's Perfect List , 2003 .

[6]  David W. Nickerson,et al.  Getting Out the Vote in Local Elections: Results from Six Door-to-Door Canvassing Experiments , 2003 .

[7]  M. Wattenberg,et al.  Where Have All the Voters Gone? , 2002 .

[8]  Kira Sanbonmatsu.  Gender stereotypes and vote choice , 2002 .

[9]  D. Green,et al.  Do phone calls increase voter turnout?: a field experiment. , 2001, Public opinion quarterly.

[10]  Donald P. Green,et al.  Testing for Publication Bias in Political Science , 2001, Political Analysis.

[11]  Donald P. Green,et al.  Getting out the youth vote: Results from randomized field experiments , 2001 .

[12]  D. Green,et al.  The Effects of Canvassing, Telephone Calls, and Direct Mail on Voter Turnout: A Field Experiment , 2000, American Political Science Review.

[13]  Donald P. Green,et al.  The Effect of a Nonpartisan Get-Out-the-Vote Drive: An Experimental Study of Leafletting , 2000, The Journal of Politics.

[14]  W. S. Bike.  Winning Political Campaigns: A Comprehensive Guide to Electoral Success , 1998 .

[15]  Peter W. Wielhouwer,et al.  Party Contacting and Political Participation, 1952-90 , 1994 .

[16]  Joshua D. Angrist,et al.  Identification of Causal Effects Using Instrumental Variables , 1993 .

[17]  John O. Brehm.  The Phantom Respondents: Opinion Surveys and Political Representation , 1993 .

[18]  Steven J. Rosenstone,et al.  Mobilization, participation, and democracy in America , 1993 .

[19]  R. Huckfeldt,et al.  Political Parties and Electoral Mobilization: Political Structure, Social Structure, and the Party Canvass , 1992, American Political Science Review.

[20]  Gregory A. Caldeira,et al.  Partisan mobilization and electoral participation , 1990 .

[21]  Bruce E. Cain,et al.  The Efficacy of Registration Drives , 1985, The Journal of Politics.

[22]  David A. Bositis,et al.  Stimulating Voter Turnout in a Primary , 1981 .

[23]  William C. Adams,et al.  Effects of Telephone Canvassing on Turnout and Preferences: A Field Experiment , 1980 .

[24]  John C. Blydenburgh,et al.  A Controlled Experiment to Measure the Effects of Personal Contact Campaigning , 1971 .

[25]  G. Kramer.  THE EFFECTS OF PRECINCT-LEVEL CANVASSING ON VOTER BEHAVIOR , 1970 .

[26]  Malcolm E. Jewell.  Midwest Journal of Political Science , 1968 .

[27]  Samuel J. Eldersveld,et al.  Experimental Propaganda Techniques and Voting Behavior , 1956, American Political Science Review.

[28]  Alfred Mcclung Lee,et al.  Public Opinion and Propaganda , 1954 .

[29]  H. Gosnell,et al.  Getting out the vote : an experiment in the stimulation of voting , 1927 .