Suchergebnisse

Dieses Buch zeigt, unter welchen Umständen es für deutsche Wähler sinnvoll sein kann, strategisch zu wählen und warum. Anhand formaler theoretischer Analysen identifiziert es die Bedingungen, unter denen es profitabel ist, mit der Erststimme oder mit der Zweitstimme strategisch zu wählen. Das Buch zeigt ausserdem, wie strategisches Wählen in der Vergangenheit zur Entstehung von Überhangmandaten geführt hat und warum Anreize zu strategischem Wählen nicht verschwinden werden, selbst wenn wir die Erststimme abschaffen oder die 5% Hürde beseitigen. Es trägt so zu einem besseren Verständnis des deutschen Wahlrechts und einer informierten Diskussion über die Konsequenzen von Wahlrechtsänderungen bei. (Verlagswerbung)

How do polls influence strategic voting under proportional representation? This paper derives a strategic calculus of voting for coalitions that generates testable predictions about the effects of polls on strategic voting in elections involving four or more parties. Incentives of leftist voters to vote for a centrist over a noncentrist party are shown to increase with the difference in expected seats between the prospective right-wing and left-wing coalitions (and vice versa for rightist voters). Centrist voters' incentives to vote for a center-left vs a center-right party are also shown to depend on the relative strengths of the right-wing and left-wing coalitions. Importantly, the strategic voting incentives studied here do not depend on the presence of electoral thresholds or other features of the electoral system. The predictions are tested with survey data from parliamentary elections in Austria and Germany. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Ltd., copyright holder.]

How do polls influence strategic voting under proportional representation? This paper derives a strategic calculus of voting for coalitions that generates testable predictions about the effects of polls on strategic voting in elections involving four or more parties. Incentives of leftist voters to vote for a centrist over a noncentrist party are shown to increase with the difference in expected seats between the prospective right-wing and left-wing coalitions (and vice versa for rightist voters). Centrist voters' incentives to vote for a center-left vs a center-right party are also shown to depend on the relative strengths of the right-wing and left-wing coalitions. Importantly, the strategic voting incentives studied here do not depend on the presence of electoral thresholds or other features of the electoral system. The predictions are tested with survey data from parliamentary elections in Austria and Germany.

Real-world simple plurality elections rarely bear out the strong Duvergerian prediction that, in equilibrium, only two competitors receive votes. Recent advances in strategic voting theory demonstrate that voter uncertainty about competitors' true support levels in the constituency may lead to limited strategic voting, and hence incomplete desertion of trailing parties. This is the first attempt to estimate empirically the impact of uncertainty on incentives to vote strategically. Calibrating a model of strategic voting to voting results from simple plurality elections in German constituencies, it is found that strategic voters operate under high levels of uncertainty. These results support the proposition that uncertainty about party support impedes formation of Duvergerian equilibria. Adapted from the source document.