Bismillah Week 6 Voting Behavior 19/05/2014 19:23Moodle: Week 6: Voting Behaviour: Expressive or Strategic?The lecture will introduce two competing motives behind voting in elections: expressive (voting on the basis of party attachment, ideology andsocial cleavages) and strategic (voting to produce an outcome which is as close as possible to ones preferences). Regarding expressive voting, the lecture will explain the end of class voting, dealignment and post-materialism theses, and also discuss the empirical evidence on the social bases of party choice from several countries (such as the UK, USA, Germany and Japan). Regarding strategic voting, the lecture will look at policy concerns as well as valence concerns (such as the leadership qualities of party leaders), and how the complexity of the strategic context (such as the number of parties and multidimensionality) affects voters choices.

Task: What social divisions or political issues influence which parties people vote for in your adopted country? Do some people vote strategically in your adopted country, and, if so, why?Class questions: Has class-based voting declined in the past few decades? Do people vote sincerely or strategically?

Topics for todayExpressive and strategic (tactical, called this in the UK) votingSocial cleavages, leads to party identification Party identificationClass votingDealignment, breaking of the links between political parties and social groups. The spatial model of politics

Outline1. Definitions2. Political cleavages and dealignment3. Evidence: social determinants of vote choice4. Spatial politics and strategic voting5. Some examples of strategic voting

DefinitionsExpressive Voting: Voting on the basis of party attachment, political ideology, or social group membership.

Strategic Voting: Voting to produce an election outcome which is as close as possible to ones policy preferences, which may or may not mean voting for ones most preferred party.

Often these things are difficult to identify independent of each other. Researchers tend to investigate cases in which voters are torn between these types of choices.

Political Cleavage: A division in society which produces an alignment between a group of voters and a party (e.g. class, religion, language, urban-rural etc.)

Dealignment: The erosion of political cleavages, and their replacement with individualistic voting. Empirically, we have gradually seen an erosion of the divisions of the 1950s and 60s deep social divisions which led to a closer relationship of cleavages to parties worldwide, voters thinking more strategically. Voters are thinking more strategically when they go in the ballot box.

The Cleavage Model of Electoral Politics (1920s-1970s?)Lipset and Rokkan

Developed in the 1960s by Seymour Lipset and Rokkan. They were looking at the fact that the parties you observed in Europe in the 1960s were broadly the same as the parties you observed in Europe in the 1920s, and thered been dramatic changes in European society, wed had the second world war, wed had the birth and the growth of the welfare state, a whole lot of changes. Yet, we had the same sort of parties (socialist, conservatives, liberals) and we had the same sort of social groups that we had in the 1920s, and they tried to then come up with an explanation about why this was the case. They argued that you had universal suffrage in the 1920s that created a link between voters and parties. Universal suffrage led to these mass political parties setting up mass party organizations, the labor party socialist parties across Europe closely aligned to the labor movement, with newspapers, party members, etc.You had this alignment then between these social groups and these political parties, and wed normally talk about the fact that there were deep divisions in society and these deep divisions were then reflected in the class system. Very stable relationships across time.

Which Cleavages? Seymour M. Lipset (American) & Stein Rokkan (Norwegian) (1967)IT IS IRONICALLY THE CHANGE IN CLEAVAGES THAT ALLOWS US TO UNDERSTAND THE SUPPOSED DEALLIGNMENT

National Revolution (18-19th C) -> conflict between centre & periphery=> national elites vs. local regional/sub-national elitesThe formation of states in Europe in the 18th and 19th century. Harmoginization of politics but not full.

Democratic Revolution (19th C) -> conflict between church & state=> traditional elites vs. liberal professionsLeft and right come from French Rev (indiv rights vs state) in France Conservative vs liberals in UK

Same time; Industrial Revolution (19th C) -> conflict between social classes=> working class vs. middle/upper classEmergence of socialist parties.

1920s: introduction of universal suffrage-> freezing of these social cleavages in the new party systemsExisting divisions in society suddenly emerge and you create mass parties to reflect divisions-> Created Party Identification class-based voting Ex working class, socialist democratic party in UK, elites conservative.

Social group Party the group identifies withWorking classSocial DemocratsMiddle/Upper classConservatives (or Liberals)ReligiousConservatives (or Christian Democrats)Atheists/AgnosticsLiberals / Social DemocratsCentreSocial Dems / Conservatives / LiberalsPeripheryRegionalist / Linguistic minority parties

Causes of DealignmentIrony: Book published in 1967, during massive social change in Europe, really capturing 1950s.

Economic growth + prosperityeconomic security no longer the primary goal of all voters=> declining class conflictPOST-MATERIALISM.

Expansion of the public sectorgrowth to 40-50% of GDP in the public sector, more employment thus GDP per capita, etc. Not classically liberal professors OR industrial workers. => new social groups, with new values & new interests

Expansion of higher educationgrowing social mobility => changing aspirations=> higher levels of cognitive skills in societyBreaks the historical class link within families, not passed on between generations. Growing education, higher cognitive endowment

Mass media, these days social media replacement of party-controlled media=> personalisation of politicsParties, unlike in the beginning of the 20th century, no longer control info (pluralisation of media, conflicting views, etc.)

Decline in class-voting: Measuring Class VotingThe Alford Index (Alford 1962): Still used today across time and across country:

% of working class voters who vote for a left-wing partyminus % of non-working class voters who vote for a left-wing party

Example: 2010 UK Elections ABC1 (upper & middle class) DE (working class)Labour2740Liberal Democrat2617Conservative3931

Alford Index = 40 27 = 13%

Declining Class Voting(from Dalton 2002)No recent data, according to Hix, doesnt matter any more.

Break in traditional class-based alignment. (European and American only, advanced democracies).

Links to US as another Western example:

Andrew Gelman, Columbia (2008) Red States, Blue States, Rich States, Poor StatesThere seems to be a strange pattern of voting in the US:At the aggregate level (e.g. US states), richer states tend to vote Democrat, while poorer states tend to vote RepublicanWhereas at the individual level, richer people tend to vote Republican, while poorer people tend to vote Democrat=> How can this be explained?

2004 and 2008 US Presidential Elections

Poorer States Vote Republican !

But, Richer People Vote Republican

Explaining the Pattern:Class matters more in poor states

Class Voting in the UK

How about Religion?

Does religious affiliation or church attendance correlate with party voting?

The Spatial Model of PoliticsVoters have preferences about a range of policiesThese preferences are single-peaked => each voter has anideal point in a single- or multi-dimensional policy spaceExpressive voting => a citizen votes for the party whose policy position is closest to her ideal policyStrategic voting=> a citizen votes to try to influence the outcome of an election, so that the overall policy outcome (e.g. the person elected, or the government that is formed) is closest to her ideal policy of all the likely outcomes=> this might be the party closest to her ideal point, or it might not

Why Vote Strategically?Two main reasons for voting strategically in an election:1. Local: To influence the election outcome in a constituency If the candidate a person most prefers has no chance of being elected, then vote for the closest candidate from amongst the candidates who have a reasonable chance of being elected2. National: To influence government formation and policy outcomesIf the party a person most prefers has no chance of influencing government formation or might form a coalition with a party which is further away from a persons preference,then vote for a party which is further away, but which will lead to a policy outcome closer to a persons ideal policy

Examples (Western, use Lebanon as another example):

Positions of the Parties also plays a role, and Electoral systems design (ex. Expecting coalition, etc).

In SumUntil the late 1960s, most citizens in Western democracies had strong attachments to a particular political party because of their class/income, religious view, or regional locationIn the past 30+ years, these attachments have broken for many votersAs a result, electoral politics in most Western democracies is now more like shopping than class warfare !i.e. people vote for the party they most prefer, or vote for another party if their most preferred party doesnt have a chanceBut, because citizens who are located on the Left (Right) vote for a party on the Left (Right), class alignments (e.g. income) can still be a strong predictor of how people vote=> Clearly, where parties are located is a key factor in explaining which parties people choose (which we will look at next week)

ReferencesAlford, Robert (1962) A Suggested Index of the Association of Social Class and Voting, Public Opinion Quarterly 26: 417-412.Dalton, Russell J. (2002) Political Cleavages, Issues, and Electoral Change, in Lawrence LeDuc, Richard G. Niemi and Pippa Norris (eds.) Comparing Democracies 2: New Challenges in the Study of Elections and Voting, London: Sage.Gelman, Andrew (2008) Red States, Blue States, Rich States, Poor States: Why Americans Vote the Way They Do, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Lipset, Seymour M. and Stein Rokkan (1967) Cleavage Structures, Party Systems and Voter Alignments. Introduction, in Seymour M. Lipset and Stein Rokkan (eds) Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives, New York: Free Press.

Bismillah Al-Rahman Al-Rahim Voting behavior 19/05/2014 19:23

Week 6: Voting Behaviour: Expressive or Strategic? 8 items

Week 6: Voting Behaviour: Expressive or Strategic? 8 items

Essential Reading 2 items The Science of Politics: An Introduction - Josep Colomer 2011 BookEssential PLEASE READ CHAPTER 10 "ELECTORAL COMPETITION". Online ResourceRead status Add note

Comparing democracies 2: new challenges in the study of elections and voting - LeDuc, Lawrence, Niemi, Richard G., Norris, Pippa 2002 BookEssential PLEASE READ CHAPTER 9 "POLITICAL CLEAVAGES, ISSUES, AND ELECTORAL CHANGE" BY RUSSELL J. DALTON. Online ResourceRead status Add note Further Reading 6 items

The West European Party System - Peter Mair 1990 BookBackground PLEASE READ CHAPTER "CLEAVAGE STRUCTURES, PARTY SYSTEMS, AND VOTER ALIGNMENTS" BY SEYMOUR MARTIN LIPSET AND STEIN ROKKAN. Preview Read status Add note

Comparing Strategic Voting Under FPTP and PR - Paul R. Abramson, John H. Aldrich, Andre Blais, Matthew Diamond 2010 ArticleBackground Online ResourceRead status Add note

Red state, blue state, rich state, poor state: why Americans vote the way they do - Gelman, Andrew 2010 BookBackground PLEASE READ CHAPTER 2 "RICH STATE, POOR STATE". Online ResourceRead status Add note

The Continued Significance of Class Voting - Geoffrey Evans 2000 ArticleBackground Online ResourceRead status Add note

Minor Parties and Strategic Voting in Recent U.S. Presidential Elections - Barry C. Burden 2005 ArticleBackground Online ResourceRead status Add note

New Labour, New Tactical Voting? The Causes and Consequences of Tactical Voting in the 1997 General Election - Geoffrey Evans, John Curtice, Pippa Norris 1998 ArticleBackground