Do the effects of harsher campaigns on voters' political support depend on:
➡️ the number of competing parties in an election?
➡️ a party's ideological distance to the next closest competitor?
➡️ the presence of a viable alternative for a voter?
📊 Key findings 👇
➡️ the number of competing parties in an election?
➡️ a party's ideological distance to the next closest competitor?
➡️ the presence of a viable alternative for a voter?
📊 Key findings 👇
Comments
Note: Model contains fixed effect + random slopes without other covariates.
Note: Previously negative baseline effects render positive after inclusion of covariates such as parties' euroskepticism.
4️⃣ Voters lend less political support to parties leading harsher campaigns when they have an at least equally attractive alternative to choose from!
Parties lose any “negativity bonus” among voters that are ideologically at least equally close to their competition.
➡️ having better alternatives shapes how voters assess and react to negative or uncivil campaigns.
➡️ harsh campaigns may mobilize core supporters, but risk alienating swing voters with viable alternatives.