Majority runoff elections: Strategic voting and Duverger's hypothesis
نویسندگان
چکیده
The majority runoff system is widely used around the world, yet our understanding of its properties and of voters’ behavior is limited. In this paper, we fully characterize the set of strictly perfect voting equilibria in large three-candidate majority runoff elections. Considering all possible distributions of preference orderings and intensities, we prove that only two types of equilibria can exist. First, there are always equilibria in which only two candidates receive votes. Second, there may exist an equilibrium in which three candidates receive votes. Its characteristics challenge common beliefs: (i) neither sincere voting by all voters nor pushover tactics (i.e., supporters of the front-runner voting for a less preferred candidate so as to influence who will face the front-runner in the second round) are supported in equilibrium, and (ii) the winner does not necessarily have democratic legitimacy since the Condorcet winner may not even participate in the second round.
منابع مشابه
Strategic Voting, Mixed and Runoff Elections: Evidence from Hungary
I attempt to quantify strategic voting using the mixed (proportional and plurality) dual ballot election system in Hungary. The main finding is that there is a moderate amount of desertion of “third parties”. The smaller the likelihood of a second round, and the closer the large parties are, the more pronounced the desertion, consistent with a hypothesis of strategic voting. I thank Chishio Fur...
متن کاملSupplement to “ Majority runoff elections : Strategic voting and Duverger ’ s hypothesis ” : Technical appendices
In Appendix C, for a large class of Poisson games, we define Bayes–Nash equilibrium and extend the definition of strictly perfect equilibrium (Okada 1981). We show some useful properties of Nash equilibria and we characterize the set of strictly perfect equilibria. We define a limit property of Nash equilibria as the number of players grows large: asymptotic strict perfection. Our characterizat...
متن کاملMulticandidate elections: Aggregate uncertainty in the laboratory
The rational-voter model is often criticized on the grounds that two of its central predictions (the paradox of voting and Duverger's Law) are at odds with reality. Recent theoretical advances suggest that these empirically unsound predictions might be an artifact of an (arguably unrealistic) assumption: the absence of aggregate uncertainty about the distribution of preferences in the electorat...
متن کاملSimple plurality versus plurality runoff with privately informed voters
This paper compares two voting methods commonly used in presidential elections: simple plurality voting and plurality runoff. In a situation in which a group of voters have common interests but do not agree on which candidate to support due to private information, information aggregation requires them to split their support between their favorite candidates. However, if a group of voters split ...
متن کاملStrategic Voting In British Elections
Strategic Voting In British Elections In this paper we examine the extent to which voters engage in strategic behavior. Our contribution is accounting for the context in which voters have the opportunity to behave in a strategic fashion. We also demonstrate that previous measures of strategic voting significantly underestimated the willingness of voters to engage in strategic behavior when pres...
متن کامل