Are Caucus-Goers Different?

John Sides posts over at The Monkey Cage some recent insight on the average Iowa caucus-goer. According to Eitan Hersh, a political scientist at Yale University, caucus-goers are not more extreme or partisan than primary voters. They are, however, more likely to be civically-engaged. This is because caucuses are civic events, not push-a-button vote-casting obligations. As such, we cannot think of the benefits of participation as simply performing a civic duty, but also the excitement of engaging with the community. As Hersh writes:

Caucuses, remember, take place mostly in rural states in the dead of winter; they provide a rare opportunity in the calendar for neighbors to gather and reconnect. And there’s also a potential social cost for abstaining – if your neighbor is an activist who asks you to attend, and you’re a no-show, you’ll have to answer for it in the morning.

I think Hersh makes a good case. Part of the reason caucus-goers might be branded as more extreme is two-fold. First, social conservatives and evangelicals tend to push similarly minded candidates into the spotlight in Republican contests (à la Pat Robertson (1988), Mike Huckabee (2008) and most likely Rick Santorum (2012)). The caucuses can also give lesser-known (and often less mainstream) candidates a shot at the spotlight. As a result, many journalists conclude that caucus-goers must be more dedicated, partisan and extreme than primary voters, ceteris paribus.

Hersh gives good reason to question this conclusion. Hersh only looks at the 2008 election, which could be anomalous. Further examination would likely find, however, that Hersh’s conclusions are pretty spot-on.