Casualties and Incumbents: Do the Casualties from Interstate Conflicts Affect Incumbent Party Vote Share?
نویسنده
چکیده
Research suggests that the costs of international conflict (e.g. casualties) alter public opinion, executive approval and policy positions of elected officials. However, do casualties affect voting in terms of aggregate outcomes and individual vote choices? This article examines how casualties from interstate conflicts affect voter behaviour, specifically incumbent vote share. Using the investment model of commitment to model individual vote choice, it is argued that increases in the costs of conflict (i.e., more casualties) can increase the probability that voters will support the incumbent, increasing incumbent vote share. This model is tested with both cross-national aggregate data from twenty-three countries and individual-level British survey data. The results support the argument.
منابع مشابه
Democracy and Government Performance: Holding Incumbents Accountable in English Local Governments
The link between government performance and support for incumbents is a key mechanism of accountable government. We model the vote share of incumbent administrations in local government as proportional and nonproportional responses to public service performance. We evaluate the models using a panel data set covering performance and elections from 2001 to 2007 in English local governments where ...
متن کاملWars , Presidents and Popularity : The Political Cost ( s ) of War Re - examined
Extensive research demonstrates that war casualties depress incumbent popularity. The present study argues that analyses of the political costs of warfare should also account for the financial toll of wars since a) financial costs of wars are substantial, b) these costs are publicly observed and understood and c) fiscal policy affects incumbents' approval ratings. Empirical evidence based on US...
متن کاملIncumbent and Challenger Campaign Spending Effects in Proportional Electoral Systems: the Irish Elections
Positive effects of campaign spending on electoral outcomes have been found in several comparative, multiparty contexts (e.g. Britain, France, Japan, and Australia) but very few of these systems use proportional representation (PR). The handful of studies that have examined spending effects in multi-party elections (e.g. Brazil, Flanders) have found that incumbent spending is no less effective ...
متن کاملDoes Campaign Spending Work? Field Experiments Provide Evidence and Suggest New Theory
This article reports the results of several field experiments designed to measure campaign effects in partisan contests. The findings suggest incumbent campaigns failed to increase incumbent vote share, whereas the challenger campaign was effective. To understand these and other results, the incumbent’s optimal spending strategy was analyzed theoretically. The analysis reveals that if incumbent...
متن کاملIraq Casualties and the 2006 Senate Elections
Prior scholarship on the effects of war casualties on U.S. elections has focused on large-scale conflicts. For this article, we examined whether or not the much-smaller casualty totals incurred in Iraq had a similar influence on the 2006 Senate contests. We found that the change in vote share from 2000 to 2006 for Republican Senate candidates at both the state and county level was significantly...
متن کامل