Partisan Politics and Aggregation Failure with Ignorant Voters†
نویسندگان
چکیده
We analyze how voter ignorance effects competing candidates’ policy choices and election outcomes. We show that voter ignorance of policy positions has no effect in large elections provided voters know the preference distribution in the electorate. We then explore a model where voters are ignorant of policy positions and of the preference distribution. In that case limit equilibria (as the number of voters gets large) yield partisan politics (i.e., candidates may not adopt the median favored policy) and aggregation failure (i.e., voters may reject the median preferred alternative). These non-Downsian conclusions hold even when candidates have weak policy preferences and mostly care about winning the election. † Financial support from the National Science Foundation is gratefully acknowledged.
منابع مشابه
Divisive Politics and Accountability
The paper analyzes a political accountability game with an electorate of ’partisan’ and ’independent’ voters. It is shown that politicians have a strategic incentive to engage in ’divisive politics’, that is, to force some independent voters to take sides, even if the direct electoral benefits are higher for their opponents than for themselves. By polarizing the electorate, the incumbent politi...
متن کاملVoting Behavior, Preference Aggregation and Tax Design
The empirical evidence on voting behavior suggests that the individuals’ choice of the vote is explained, among other things, by policy issues and the voters’ partisan preferences over the party that rules the government. The evidence also indicates that the voters’ partisan preferences are the best predictor of the choice of the vote (Republican and Democratic voters tend to vote, respectively...
متن کاملParty attachment and political accountability
This paper analyzes a political accountability model with an electorate of partisanand swingvoters. It is shown that politicians have a strategic incentive to engage in divisive politics(that is, to force some independent voters to take sides) even if the direct electoral bene ts are higher for their opponents than for themselves. By polarizing the electorate, the incumbent politician wea...
متن کاملPolicy Herding as a Challenge to Political Persuasion∗
Can rationally ignorant voters and informed politicians lead to persistently inefficient policies in a democracy? A long tradition of thought in political science and economics has answered negatively, due to the averaging out of randomly uninformed voters or persuasion attempts in a competitive setting. Rather, explanations for the persistence of inefficient policies has focused on interest gr...
متن کاملZaller's Theory of Media Politics: Testing the deductions at the state level
Professor John Zaller has developed "A Theory of Media Politics" that posits a system of political campaigns in which voters, presidential candidates and the media are dependent on one another (Zaller, 1998). This theory is a direct descendant of An Economic Theory of Democracy, (Downs, 1957) which portrays voters and candidates as rational actors. Zaller's theory expands Downs' model to includ...
متن کامل