After defeat: how governing parties respond to electoral loss

被引:2
作者
Margalit, Yotam [1 ]
Slough, Tara [2 ]
Ting, Michael M. [3 ]
机构
[1] Tel Aviv Univ, Tel Aviv, Israel
[2] NYU, New York, NY USA
[3] Columbia Univ, New York, NY USA
关键词
Political parties; ideological positioning; intraparty governance; selectorate; leadership selection; POLICY; ELECTIONS; POSITIONS; COUNTRIES; CANDIDATE; SELECTION; IDEOLOGY; VOTES;
D O I
10.1017/psrm.2021.62
中图分类号
D0 [政治学、政治理论];
学科分类号
0302 ; 030201 ;
摘要
How do governing parties respond in terms of ideological positioning when voted out of office? We study both theoretically and empirically the factors that shape parties' responses following a loss. Studying national elections in advanced industrialized democracies over the past 70 years, we show that parties tend to counter their pre-election shifts, and do so particularly strongly following defeat. The extent of these ideological shifts is more limited in parties with a larger selectorate voting on the party leadership. Moreover, we find that subsequent to loss, parties are less likely to run on a centrist platform. Notably, shifting away from the center is associated with a higher probability of returning to power. We then introduce a dynamic model of party leadership selection and platform positioning. The model produces patterns of ideological positions over time that are consistent with our empirical findings.
引用
收藏
页码:739 / 758
页数:20
相关论文
共 39 条
[1]   Understanding change and stability in party ideologies: Do parties respond to public opinion or to past election results? [J].
Adams, J ;
Clark, M ;
Ezrow, L ;
Glasgow, G .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 2004, 34 :589-610
[2]   Candidate and party strategies in two-stage elections beginning with a primary [J].
Adams, James ;
Merrill, Samuel, III .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 2008, 52 (02) :344-359
[3]   Moderate Now, Win Votes Later: The Electoral Consequences of Parties' Policy Shifts in 25 Postwar Democracies [J].
Adams, James ;
Somer-Topcu, Zeynep .
JOURNAL OF POLITICS, 2009, 71 (02) :678-692
[4]  
Angrist JD, 2009, MOSTLY HARMLESS ECONOMETRICS: AN EMPIRICISTS COMPANION, P1
[5]   Measuring party positions in Europe: The Chapel Hill expert survey trend file, 1999-2010 [J].
Bakker, Ryan ;
de Vries, Catherine ;
Edwards, Erica ;
Hooghe, Liesbet ;
Jolly, Seth ;
Marks, Gary ;
Polk, Jonathan ;
Rovny, Jan ;
Steenbergen, Marco ;
Vachudova, Milada Anna .
PARTY POLITICS, 2015, 21 (01) :143-152
[6]   Government versus Opposition at the Polls: How Governing Status Affects the Impact of Policy Positions [J].
Bawn, Kathleen ;
Somer-Topcu, Zeynep .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 2012, 56 (02) :433-446
[7]   The Race to the Base [J].
Bernhardt, Dan ;
Buisseret, Peter ;
Hidir, Sinem .
AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2020, 110 (03) :922-942
[8]   A NEW SPATIAL THEORY OF PARTY COMPETITION - UNCERTAINTY, IDEOLOGY AND POLICY EQUILIBRIA VIEWED COMPARATIVELY AND TEMPORALLY [J].
BUDGE, I .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 1994, 24 :443-467
[9]   Ideology, Party Factionalism and Policy Change: An integrated dynamic theory [J].
Budge, Ian ;
Ezrow, Lawrence ;
McDonald, Michael D. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 2010, 40 :781-804
[10]   Who selects the party leader? [J].
Cross, William ;
Blais, Andre .
PARTY POLITICS, 2012, 18 (02) :127-150