This article studies the interplay of U.S. primary and general elections. I examine how the nomination of an extremist changes general-election outcomes and legislative behavior in the U.S. House, 19802010, using a regression discontinuity design in primary elections. When an extremistas measured by primary-election campaign receipt patternswins a coin-flip election over a more moderate candidate, the partys general-election vote share decreases by approximately 913 percentage points, and the probability that the party wins the seat decreases by 3554 percentage points. This electoral penalty is so large that nominating the more extreme primary candidate causes the districts subsequent roll-call representation to reverse, becoming more liberal when an extreme Republican is nominated and more conservative when an extreme Democrat is nominated. Overall, the findings show how general-election voters act as a moderating filter in response to primary nominations.