Determinants of Election Results

1. Determinants of Election Results 6 November 2013

2. The sad losers of politics

3. Clinton campaign - 1992

4. Early election studies – 1940s-50s • Surprises • Little effect of campaign • Lack of information • Most voters don’t know issue stands of candidates • Most voters have strong “brand loyalties” from religion and social class • Political preferences like taste in music – very little thinking and reasoning

5. Problematic for democracy • What are elections and campaigns for if voters not informed and don’t change? • All that matters is likeability of candidate and recent events

6. Responses – Voters not so bad • Other studies find more ideological consistency • Voters use of heuristics to make better choices: information shortcuts • Collective rationality: miracle of aggregation • Voters capable of retrospective evaluations

7. Electoral Accountability • Even if voters don’t choose/select best candidates, maybe they can still reward and punish governments • Retrospective economic voting • Do citizens hold politicians accountable for their performance in office?

8. Virtues of accountability • Powerful disciplinary force • Remove bad politicians from office • Incentive to perform better • Simplicity: Am I better off today? Have governments done as well as they could? • Don’t need very much information • Governments don’t know voters’ standards, so have to work very hard • Is 3% growth good enough? 4%?

9. Flaws of accountability • Because a harsh verdict, politicians may overreach • Do anything to increase growth • Avoid unpopular but necessary policies (eg, pension reform) • Crude signal: thumbs-up or thumbs-down • Backward looking • Politicians are free between elections – election day is only moment of accountability

10. Issues in economic voting • What is poor performance? • Just economics? Also corruption? Other policy areas? • Whose judgments? • Subjective judgments of voters or objective state of economy? • Personal conditions of voters (pocketbook, egocentric) or general state of economy (sociotropic)

11. How to study the economic vote? • Surveys – individual-level • Views on state of economy (better/same/worse) and vote for government (yes/no) • Actual election results – aggregate-level • National level: vote for government and growth/inflation/unemployment rate • Regional level: vote for government in district and economy in district • Ecological inference problem: can’t generalize from higher level to lower level • If communists popular in poor REGIONS, it doesn’t mean that poor PEOPLE like communists – maybe yes, maybe no

12. What do we know? • Aggregate studies (eg, Powell and Whitten) • Economy is important, but differs across contexts • In particular: • Clarity of responsibility: can voters tell who is responsible for economy – coalition government, bicameralism, federalism, etc. • Different parties responsible for different things: left is responsible for unemployment, right for inflation

13. What do we know? • Survey studies (Duch and Stevenson) • Economy matters, but differs across contexts • Again: clarity of responsibility • But also type of economy: • Open, liberalized economy = governments have less control over economy => small economic vote • Same for larger state (spending/GDP)

14. One strange result • General state of the economy (sociotropic) seems to be more important than personal economic situation (egocentric, pocketbook) • Why?

15. Economic voting in Postcommunist Europe

16. Costs of governing • Most incumbent governments lose votes: 2-3% • Why? • Over time governments make decisions that hurt individual groups • Citizens remember losses more than gains

17. Very high costs of government in postcommunist Europe • 30 of 34 incumbent governments lose • Very few governments return to power • On average 15% loss • Vote share from 43% => 27% • CZ mostly avoided this problem until recently

18. Why such consistent punishment? • Is economic performance so bad? No • All politicians corrupt? • But vicious circle: high levels of punishment => incentive to be corrupt because can’t win => more punishment • Overly high expectations for leaders • Should reward above average and punish below average • Tradition of protest voting under communism

19. Does economy matter? • Yes! • Regressions of incumbent vote share on economic variables • Strong effect: bad economy = worse performance for incumbents • Voters most sensitive to unemployment • Other studies find effects of inequality • But even the most successful incumbents don’t do well

20. Economic voting in CZ

21. Czech economic voting

22. US economic voting

23. Czech context • Is there clarity of responsibility? • Strange result that small parties punished much more than large ones • CSSD, ODS fairly constant until now • But consider: ODA, US, KDU, VV

24. Bad incentives in postcommunist Europe • Incumbents know that they will lose • Voters punish all government • Therefore why should you govern well? • Better to reward friends • Prepare for life after politics • Don’t work very hard

25. Problems with economic voting

26. Extreme myopia • Retrospective economic voting should give politicians an incentive to produce better economy • But what economy do voters care about • Mainly last year of electoral term or even last 3 months! • Politicians should thus only worry about economy at end of term

27. Duration neglect • Voters forget the length of good times and bad times • Churchill in 1945: Wasn’t saving you from the Nazis enough? • Answer: No • Or: • I don’t know what the parties are doing now, but I know the Communists were bad.

28. Political business cycle • At end of term: make sure economy is growing • Print money • Spend money • At start of term: not important • Need to deal with mess from previous government • Reward people you want to help • Is this good economic policy? • Helps explain independent central bank

30. Partisan differences in viewing economy • Supporters of government parties see economy as better, supporters of opposition see as worse

31. Blind retrospection • Voters will punish governments for shark attacks, droughts, flu, sports losses! • God punishes society for sin? • When voters in pain, they kick the government • Even if it is not government’s fault! • Also, reward for good events outside of control • Eg, oil price rises in oil-producing areas

32. Shark attacks!

33. Local sports team victory

34. What policies should politicians chose? • Voters reward politicians for disaster relief spending but not for disaster prevention

35. Politicians know this • Recent survey of state legislators • 60% believe that voters usually base their choices only on very recent events • 35% believe voters “sometimes decide whether to vote for incumbents based on things completely unrelated to politics, like whether their favorite football team recently won a game.”

36. What has happened in the Great Recession? • Crisis of financial capitalism • Expect voters to turn to the left • Punish capitalists • Increase welfare • But right does slightly better (though only small effect) • Biggest effect = punishment of incumbents

38. Have extremists benefited from crisis? • Not consistently: only 4 countries with large gains for far right

39. In short • Whoever is in office at time of crisis loses and loses badly • Voters aren’t trying to choose best policies • Voters aren’t able to attribute blame • Which parties were responsible for crisis? • Who did the best job fighting against it?

40. Is all lost? • We still have democracy • Governments still lose elections • Economy plays some role • Though politicians can’t influence it so much • But also a lot of randomness