The Many Faces of Strategic Voting
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Revised Pages The Many Faces of Strategic Voting Strategic voting is classically defined as voting for one’s second pre- ferred option to prevent one’s least preferred option from winning when one’s first preference has no chance. Voters want their votes to be effective, and casting a ballot that will have no influence on an election is undesirable. Thus, some voters cast strategic ballots when they decide that doing so is useful. This edited volume includes case studies of strategic voting behavior in Israel, Germany, Japan, Belgium, Spain, Switzerland, Canada, and the United Kingdom, providing a conceptual framework for understanding strategic voting behavior in all types of electoral systems. The classic definition explicitly considers strategic voting in a single race with at least three candidates and a single winner. This situation is more com- mon in electoral systems that have single- member districts that employ plurality or majoritarian electoral rules and have multiparty systems. Indeed, much of the literature on strategic voting to date has considered elections in Canada and the United Kingdom. This book contributes to a more general understanding of strategic voting behavior by tak- ing into account a wide variety of institutional contexts, such as single transferable vote rules, proportional representation, two- round elec- tions, and mixed electoral systems. Laura B. Stephenson is Professor of Political Science at the University of Western Ontario. John Aldrich is Pfizer- Pratt University Professor of Political Science at Duke University. André Blais is Professor of Political Science at the Université de Montréal. Revised Pages Revised Pages THE MANY FACES OF STRATEGIC VOTING Tactical Behavior in Electoral Systems Around the World Edited by Laura B. Stephenson, John H. Aldrich, and André Blais University of Michigan Press Ann Arbor Revised Pages Copyright © 2018 by Laura B. Stephenson, John H. Aldrich, and André Blais All rights reserved This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, including illustrations, in any form (beyond that copying permitted by Sections 107 and 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law and except by reviewers for the public press), without written permission from the publisher. Published in the United States of America by the University of Michigan Press Manufactured in the United States of America Printed on acid- free paper First published November 2018 A CIP catalog record for this book is available from the British Library. Library of Congress Cataloging- in- Publication data has been applied for. ISBN 978-0- 472- 13102- 0 (hardcover : alk. paper) ISBN 978- 0-472-12430- 5 (e- book) Cover illustration courtesy of Pexels. Revised Pages Acknowledgments Many components of this volume emerged from the Making Electoral Democracy Work project, which was supported by a grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. SSHRC’s generous support brought together a diverse group of researchers interested in the intersections of voting behavior, party strategy, and electoral systems and made it possible to gather considerable data that have contributed to an improved understanding of electoral democracy around the world. This volume is dedicated to the special people in our lives who support us in all we do and to the voters around the world who keep us guessing about their motivations. Revised Pages Revised Pages Contents ONE Strategic Voting and Political Institutions 1 John H. Aldrich, André Blais, and Laura B. Stephenson TWO The Effect of National and Constituency Expectations on Tactical Voting in the British General Election of 2010 28 Paul R. Abramson, John H. Aldrich, Abraham Diskin, Aaron M. Houck, Renan Levine, Thomas J. Scotto, and David B. Sparks THREE Strategic Voting in Changing Times: The 2016 Election in Spain 61 Ignacio Lago FOUR Support for Minority Government and Strategic Voting 75 Jean- François Daoust FIVE Information on Party Strength and Strategic Voting: Evidence of Non- Effects from a Randomized Experiment 89 André Blais, Peter Loewen, Daniel Rubenson, Laura B. Stephenson, and Elisabeth Gidengil SIX Expected Electoral Performance, Candidate Quality, and Voter Strategic Coordination: The Case of Japan 104 Carolina Plescia SEVEN Strategic Coalition Voting in Belgium: The 2014 Federal and Regional Elections 127 Tom Verthé and Stefanie Beyens Revised Pages viii Contents EIGHT Voting Strategically in Two- Vote Elections 150 Philipp Harfst, André Blais, and Damien Bol NINE Strategic Voting in Multiwinner Elections with Approval Balloting: An Application to the 2011 Regional Government Election in Zurich 178 Karine Van der Straeten, Romain Lachat, and Jean- François Laslier TEN Sincere Voting, Strategic Voting: A Laboratory Experiment Using Alternative Proportional Systems 203 Isabelle Lebon, Antoinette Baujard, Frédéric Gavrel, Herrade Igersheim, and Jean- François Laslier Contributors 233 Index 239 Revised Pages ONE Strategic Voting and Political Institutions John H. Aldrich, André Blais, and Laura B. Stephenson In 1999, Israel held an early election. For only the second (and last) time, citizens cast two votes.1 One was the usual vote for party representation in the Knesset, which allocated seats to the parties in near proportion to the percentage of votes they received. The other was a separate vote for candidates, with the candidate receiving the most votes directly elected as prime minister. Several early candidates for prime minister dropped out, leaving three who ran throughout the campaign. The leaders of the two dominant parties, Ehud Barak and incumbent Benjamin Netanyahu, received the most votes, with Barak winning.2 A third candidate, Yitzhak Mordechai, ran as the head of the newly formed Center Party, which had broken away from Likud and PM Netanyahu. Mordechai was running rea- sonably strongly in third place, but with Barak rising in the polls and his fortunes declining, Mordechai withdrew his candidacy the day before the election.3 Subsequent studies showed that one important factor in citizens’ decisions was their perception that Mordechai was increasingly likely to lose and that their votes were better spent in support of Barak, whom they preferred to Netanyahu and who, unlike Mordechai, could win (Abramson et al. 2004). Such decisions by voters are referred to as “strategic” voting, because the choices they make reflect the strategic setting of the campaign. Typi- cally, the idea is to avoid “wasting” a vote on a candidate or party whom the voter likes but who cannot win by giving it instead to a candidate or party whom the voter finds less attractive but who may well win, thereby defeat- Revised Pages 2 The Many Faces of Strategic Voting ing an option the voter likes even less. Thus, some voters who disliked Netanyahu considered voting for Mordechai, their most preferred choice, or Barak, their second choice. In this instance, Mordechai lost support right at the end of the campaign as the strategic setting evolved such that those who especially disliked Netanyahu settled on Barak. As it became clear that Mordechai could not win but that Barak might, even more vot- ers changed from Mordechai to Barak to avoid wasting votes. Those who reasoned in this fashion are said to have voted strategically. Had Mordechai stayed in the running, many others would undoubtedly have continued to vote for him in spite of the strategic setting.4 Such voters are referred to as sincere voters, voting for whom they prefer regardless of the strategic context. Sincere and strategic voting have similarities (they are both based on preferences, or utilities) but they also differ (since only strategic voters form expectations about likely outcomes and act upon those expectations). Those expectations combine with their preferences regarding the various outcomes to form expected utilities— to determine for which party these voters cast their ballots. Sincere voters, by contrast, act on their preferences but do not consider expectations in determining their actions. The chapters in this book study the question of the existence, extent, and conditions under which voters reason strategically and thus engage in strategic voting in a wide variety of institutional settings and in elections in different strategic contexts. This variation provides the opportunity to test several theoretical propositions about voters and their inclination to engage in strategic reasoning. By examining voters in these different insti- tutional and electoral contexts, we not only learn about how voters reason and thus about their role in democratic politics but also explain more fully voting decisions and outcomes in many different elections. Each of the chapters involves original data, often survey-based but including laboratory and survey-embedded experiments. While sources vary, more than half the chapters draw their data from the Making Elec- toral Democracy Work (MEDW) project led by André Blais (2010). This project includes detailed analyses of party strategies, voting behavior, and laboratory experiments. According to the project’s website (www.chairelec toral.com/medw.html), The goal of the MEDW project is to examine how the rules of the game (especially the electoral system) and the electoral context (especially the competitiveness and salience of the election) influ- ence the dynamic and reciprocal relationship between voters and parties. Revised Pages Strategic Voting and Political Institutions 3 The nations studied (Canada, France, Germany, Spain, and Switzerland) were chosen