<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	
	xmlns:adano="http://adambrown.info/p/xmlns/adano#" 
>

<channel>
	<title>Abstract Politics &#187; challenger entry</title>
	<atom:link href="http://abstractpolitics.com/tag/challenger-entry/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://abstractpolitics.com</link>
	<description>Notes on political science research</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Feb 2012 23:07:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Challenger Entry and Voter Learning</title>
		<link>http://abstractpolitics.com/2008/04/challenger-entry-and-voter-learning/</link>
		<comments>http://abstractpolitics.com/2008/04/challenger-entry-and-voter-learning/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:59:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>A.B.</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[American Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[american political science review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[challenger entry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[congressional elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[low-information rationality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[voting and elections]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://abstractpolitics.com/?p=9</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Previous research has indicated that experienced, high-quality candidates are more likely to challenge Congressional incumbents when there is evidence that the incumbent is vulnerable. This makes sense; running for office is costly, both in terms of time, money, and reputation, so why should a potential candidate incur these costs if the odds of success are [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://abstractpolitics.com/2008/04/challenger-entry-and-voter-learning/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Candidate Quality, the Personal Vote, and the Incumbency Advantage in Congress</title>
		<link>http://abstractpolitics.com/2008/04/candidate-quality-the-personal-vote-and-the-incumbency-advantage-in-congress/</link>
		<comments>http://abstractpolitics.com/2008/04/candidate-quality-the-personal-vote-and-the-incumbency-advantage-in-congress/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:22:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>A.B.</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[American Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[american political science review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[challenger entry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[congressional elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[incumbency advantage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[redistricting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[voting and elections]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://abstractpolitics.com/?p=8</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If democracy requires rotation in power, then the American Congress may not be all that democratic. In 1998, 2000, and 2002, over ninety-six percent of House incumbents who have sought reelection have won. These facts are clear. What is less clear is the source of this incumbency advantage. Previous research has suggested three answers. First, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://abstractpolitics.com/2008/04/candidate-quality-the-personal-vote-and-the-incumbency-advantage-in-congress/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

