Effect of candidate experience on split-ticket outcomes in gubernatorial elections

Abstract

The phenomenon of split-ticket outcomes in gubernatorial elections is essentially unexplored in political science. By analyzing the impact of candidate experience on split-ticket results in gubernatorial elections, this research aims to fill the gap. Existing research has highlighted a number of elements that contribute to ticket-splitting, including ideological disagreements, weak party connections, and discrepancies in campaign expenditure. However, the significance of gubernatorial candidates' experiences in split-ticket outcomes has not been fully investigated. This article argues that the governorship is a unique post within state politics, prompting voters to emphasize a candidate's experience to handle state affairs while also fostering economic development and better policies. As a result, while choosing a governor, people are more likely to consider the candidate's experience as opposed to only their affiliation with a certain party. The analysis reveals a statistically significant relationship between candidate experience and split-ticket outcomes, indicating that in gubernatorial elections, voters place a greater emphasis on a candidate's experience than on party affiliation. The research reveals no significant relationship between off-year elections and split-ticket outcomes. These results offer light on the importance of experience in understanding the dynamics of the split-ticket outcome.