Suchergebnisse

General elections were held in the Kingdom of Sweden on the 9th of September 2018; parliamentary (riksdagsval), municipal (landstingsval), and local elections (kommunalval). Citizens and residents of Sweden elect 349 members of parliament, county representatives from 20 counties, and representatives of municipalities within those counties, depending on the population in each unit. Since these are general elections, the results do not vary much, and the results are similar at all levels of government. This paper presents the results decided at all levels, detailing the results for the parliamentary elections. The results of this election took European and international public by surprise. The Sweden Democrats have crystallized as a third political option in Sweden, repeating an outstanding result in two cycles in a row. The success of the Swedish Democrats has tarnished the image of liberal and tolerant Sweden and its image of neutrality in the world. It remains to be seen how Swedish politics will respond to future challenges.

I consider a model in which the winner of a primary election faces a third candidate in a general election immediately thereafter. Prior to the primary election, there is a pre-election poll on how voters would vote in a hypothetical general election between one of the candidates in the primary election and the third candidate. I illustrate that voters have an incentive to misrepresent their voting intentions in the pre-election poll in order to influence voter beliefs about candidate electability in the general election and possibly cause voters to vote differently in the primary election. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Ltd., copyright holder.]

This article argues that the increasing international interest in elections as exemplified by the rise of international election monitoring induces temporal shifts in the use of violent intimidation by political actors. The presence of international electoral missions lowers the potential for election-day violence relative to the pre-election period because domestic actors likely refrain from intimidating opposition candidates or voters before the eyes of international observers, but creates incentives for political actors to engage in violent manipulation in parts of the electoral process receiving considerably less international attention, such as the pre-election period. The article expects that international election observation increases the incidence of violent manipulation during electoral campaigns. An empirical analysis of election-related violence for African elections in the 1990-2009 period shows that the presence of election observers increases the incidence of pre-election violence, but has no effect on election-day violence. [Copyright Elsevier Ltd.]