Maybe later: Term limits and strategy behind candidate entry

Abstract While academics have examined how term limits affect elected officials, little work has gone into understanding the way they alter challenger behavior. I argue that they reduce the number of candidates who challenge incumbents, leading to a lock‐in effect. By increasing the frequency of open races, term limits incentivize potential challengers to wait for an open race. To demonstrate this, I analyze primary data from 85 legislative chambers in 44 states over a two‐decade period to see how term limits alter challenger entry patterns. I show that term‐limited incumbents face fewer challengers in their last two terms in office and challenges are weaker, while competition for open races ramps up. In doing so, I provide a major insight into how term limits alter challenger decision‐making to run for entry‐level office while improving our understanding of candidate entry by accounting for multiple potential points of entry.