Policy Preferences Influence Vote Choice When A New Party Emerges: Evidence from the 2017 French Presidential Election

2021 ◽  
pp. 003232172110463
Author(s):  
Eric Guntermann ◽  
Romain Lachat
Keyword(s):  
Panel Data ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Vote Choice ◽  
Policy Preferences ◽  
Alternative Possibility ◽  
Party Choice ◽  
Causal Direction

A common explanation for electoral victories is that the winning candidate adopted issue positions that appealed to voters, implying that citizens’ choices are based on policy preferences. However, it is not straightforward to determine the causal direction between citizens’ issue preferences and their party choice. An alternative possibility, strongly supported by prior research, is that voters adopt the positions of the parties they vote for to rationalize their votes. The 2017 French presidential election offers a unique opportunity to address that question, as it saw the victory of a candidate who was not backed by one of the established parties. Using panel data, we show that policy preferences measured prior to Macron’s emergence as a candidate led voters with a particular bundle of preferences to support him. We conclude that policy preferences clearly do matter to vote choice and that this effect is most visible when a new party emerges.

Voter Volatility and Stability in Presidential Campaigns

2020 ◽  
pp. 65-93
Author(s):  
Andy Baker ◽  
Barry Ames ◽  
Lúcio Rennó
Keyword(s):  
Panel Data ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
National Level ◽  
Vote Choice ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Presidential Campaigns ◽  
Election Campaigns ◽  
Preference Change ◽  
Horse Race ◽  
Socially Isolated

This chapter discusses novel descriptive facts on the dynamics of vote choice during presidential election campaigns. Using all available panel data from Brazil and Mexico (plus one from Argentina), it estimates the amount of preference change that occurred in 10 election campaigns. Between any two panel waves, 17 to 45 percent of voters switched across party lines. The chapter then depicts campaign volatility at the national level, using nationwide poll results to show how the horse race unfolded in the four main election cases (Brazil 2002, Brazil 2006, Brazil 2014, and Mexico 2006). These polling trends provide a brief historical background to the election cases and allow one to refute claims that the observed switching is based strictly on individual (and potentially socially isolated) calculations to avoid a wasted vote.

Attitudes toward Mormons and Voter Behavior in the 2012 Presidential Election

2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Hawley
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Party Identification ◽  
The United States ◽  
Vote Choice ◽  
Voter Behavior ◽  
Latter Day Saints ◽  
Active Member ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Church

AbstractPrior to the 2012 presidential election, some commentators speculated that Mitt Romney's status as a devout and active member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints would undermine his presidential aspirations. Using the 2012 American National Election Survey, this study examines the relationship between attitudes toward Mormons and voter behavior in the United States in that election year. It finds that attitudes toward Mormons had a statistically-significant effect on turnout — though these effects differed according to party identification. It additionally finds that these attitudes influenced vote choice. In both cases, the substantive effects were small, indicating that anti-Mormon feelings did play a role in the 2012 presidential election, but they did not determine the final outcome.

scholarly journals #NeverTrump: Why Republican members of Congress refused to support their party’s nominee in the 2016 presidential election

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 205316801774938 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren R. Johnson ◽  
Deon McCray ◽  
Jordan M. Ragusa
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
American Politics ◽  
Policy Preferences ◽  
Popular Belief ◽  
Identity Category

In an election characterized by countless headlines, the refusal of Republicans to support their party’s nominee was a constant topic of discussion in 2016. Our paper looks to explain why Republican members of Congress joined the so-called #NeverTrump movement. In the first part, we document the varied—and often contradictory—explanations of the #NeverTrump movement offered by journalists, pundits, and politicians during the campaign. We then categorize these popular explanations into four theoretical categories: policy preferences, identity, electoral motivations, and establishment dynamics. In the second part, we test the varied claims. We believe two findings stand out and have broader implications for American politics. First, despite the popular belief that members of Congress are single-minded in their pursuit of reelection, we found that a lawmaker’s religion and sex—both in the identity category—had the largest effects on the decision to join the #NeverTrump movement. Second, the results show that establishment Republicans were more likely to support Donald Trump’s candidacy. Notably, the direction of this effect is inconsistent with popular explanations of the #NeverTrump movement but consistent with a range of academic studies.

Spatial Voting in the 2004 Presidential Election

2009 ◽  
Vol 103 (01) ◽  
pp. 59-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
STEPHEN A. JESSEE
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
Survey Design ◽  
Decision Rules ◽  
Vote Choice ◽  
Voting Theory ◽  
Large Role ◽  
Spatial Voting ◽  
Policy Proposals ◽  
Existing Data ◽  
2004 Presidential Election

The theory of spatial voting has played a large role in the development of important results across many areas of political science. Directly testing the foundational assumptions of spatial voting theory, however, has not been possible with existing data. Using a novel survey design, this article obtains estimates of voter ideology on the same scale as candidate positions. The results of this scaling demonstrate that voters possess meaningful ideologies and, furthermore, that these beliefs are strongly related to the sorts of policy proposals considered in Congress. These ideology estimates are then used to uncover the actual relationships between ideology and vote choice for citizens of various types in the 2004 presidential election. Although the choices of independent voters are shown to be largely consistent with the assumptions of spatial voting theory, the decision rules used by partisans differ strongly from what unbiased spatial voting would imply. Although partisans do converge toward the behavior of independents, and hence toward the assumptions of spatial voting theory, as information levels increase, we see that even highly informed partisans show significant differences from what would be implied by unbiased spatial voting theory.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document