the presidency than the general election itself. In 1952, for example, Dwight
D. Eisenhower had far more difficulty in capturing the GOP nomination
from his intraparty rival, Senator Taft, than in defeating his Democratic
opponent, Governor Stevenson, in the general election. ( Eisenhower led
Taft 595 to 500 votes on the first ballot at the GOP Convention before
several delegations quickly shifted to Ike, giving him a clear-cut majority
before the first ballot roll call final tally was officially announced.) For these
reasons, the nominating system occupies a central role in the U.S. party
system.

The U.S. presidential nominating process is unique among Western po-
litical systems. Indeed, the presidential nominating procedure permits a de-
gree of popular control and mass participation not found elsewhere in the
free world, except Canada.

In no other Western country do so many people take part in the party
nominating process to select a national leader as in the United States. In
Great Britain, for example, less than 400 Conservative members of Parlia-
ment (MPs) select their leader, who will serve as prime minister if their
party controls the House of Commons. The British Labour Party leader is
selected under new party rules by a party-designed electoral college, con-
sisting of one-third vote of the Labour Party MPs, one-third vote by dele-
gates from the 4.5 million trade unionists, and one-third vote by delegates
from the party's 250,000 full-time members. ² In Germany the Christian
Democratic Union (CDU) Party members in the Bundestag (Parliament)
select their leader to serve as chancellor or leader of the opposition. In the
rival Social Democratic Party (SPD), the party congress chooses its parlia-
mentary leader. European party leaders, unlike their American counter-
parts, remain at their posts from one election to the next, win or lose, unless
forced to step down by their colleagues or illness causes them to resign.

In Canada, both major parties use national leadership conventions, con-
sisting of elected delegates from all ten provinces, to select a new party
leader when the position becomes vacant. But this sometimes means a long
hiatus between conventions. The Liberals, for example, did not hold a na-
tional leadership convention for more than fifteen years ( 1968-1984) dur-
ing the Pierre Trfideau era. Nor did the Progressive-Conservatives meet in
national convention for almost ten years ( 1984-1993) during Prime Min-
ister Brian Mulroney's years of service in Ottawa. ³

In the United States, however, presidential leadership selection takes
place every four years. But the nominating process has shifted over the past
four decades from the traditional "insider" decision-making system by state
party leaders at the national convention to an open or "outsider" process

-2-