To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This study explores how non-democratic experiences shape gaps in political trust between electoral winners and losers in contemporary democracies, complementing existing theories that focus solely on citizens’ limited democratic experience within democratic contexts. We argue that democracy matters twice: first through historical legacies of authoritarian rule, and second through contemporary democratic improvements. Using harmonized data from the European Social Survey and Americas Barometer across 40 countries in Europe and Latin America (2002–2018), we demonstrate that individuals with greater personal exposure to autocratic rule display stronger reactions to electoral outcomes, resulting in winner-loser gaps twice as large among those who spent their entire adult lives under autocracy compared to those with no autocratic experience. Our findings also reveal that political trust is not culturally fixed but responds to democratic quality. Short-term improvements in liberal democracy significantly narrow winner-loser gaps, primarily by increasing trust among electoral losers who benefit from enhanced checks on power, free speech, and minority rights. Conversely, democratic backsliding widens these gaps. These results enhance understanding of how historical legacies and current democratic conditions together shape political trust and provide crucial insights for understanding its political polarization (politicization) and democratic challenges in post-authoritarian societies.
Greece’s politics were dominated by renewed mobilisation over the 2023 Tempi rail disaster and by the Payment and Control Agency for Guidance and Guarantee Community Aid (OPEKEPE) agricultural subsidies scandal. The government survived a March no-confidence vote but faced sustained pressure over accountability, rule-of-law concerns and corruption. Konstantinos Tasoulas, New Democracy’s former President of the Parliament, was elected President of the Republic in February, while a March Cabinet reshuffle brought Kyriakos Pierrakakis to the Finance Ministry; in December he was elected Eurogroup President. The opposition remained fragmented. PASOK-KINAL retained its main opposition status but failed to capitalise decisively, SYRIZA continued to decline, and Alexis Tsipras resigned his parliamentary seat amid return speculation. Seismic activity on Santorini, a destructive wildfire season, a controversial labour law allowing 13-hour workdays under certain conditions, farmers’ blockades and persistent cost-of-living pressures reinforced a broader picture of governmental turbulence. By year-end, opinion polls pointed to a potential ungovernability scenario after the next parliamentary elections.
This article explores racial differences in politicians’ persistence in elections. Empirical data from California city council elections and a close election regression discontinuity show that losing an election leads to a large drop in the likelihood of rerunning for office. However, nonwhite candidates are 59% more likely than white candidates to rerun after a loss. Despite these differences in persistence, the likelihood of winning a subsequent election is similar across racial groups among those who choose to rerun. This persistence among losing nonwhite candidates helps narrow the racial representation gap in elected offices. Occupational heterogeneity analysis suggests that this difference is driven mainly by minority candidates with public or community service experience.
We evaluated an edutainment intervention to encourage electoral corruption reporting in northern Nigeria via a live broadcast of a popular Hausa-language TV show, which aired October–December 2022, shortly before the February 2023 presidential elections. We incorporated behaviorally informed anticorruption messages into the scripts of the TV drama to encourage its tens of millions of viewers to report instances of electoral corruption. We used a randomized encouragement trial design, sampling over 6,000 participants across northern Nigeria through pre-recorded phone surveys. Watching the show caused a statistically significant increase in the perceived helpfulness and frequency of reporting, but we could not detect changes in knowledge of how to report or reporting behaviors.
2025 was a year of political instability in the Netherlands. The experimental Schoof cabinet, supported by parties from the radical right and the centre-right, fell owing to disagreements over migration. New elections were called. Before the campaign was fully underway, the cabinet collapsed a second time as another party withdrew its support. The social-liberal opposition party D66, led by Rob Jetten, won the elections. By the end of the year, D66 was leading negotiations to form a centre-right government.
Remarkable forms of self-governance and collective identity developed within these carceral communities, another means of dealing with the deprivations of captivity. They encouraged solidarity and mutual support, especially among poorer prisoners. And yet, ironically, they could enable greater social control within the prison. Chapter 4 analyses the corporations – headed by elected or customarily selected stewards – through which prisoners managed life inside. They provided the foundations for practical and symbolic collective identities that prisoners also communicated to the wider world. Based around the administration of charity, this culture of self-governance gave rise to customs and practices by which prisoners collectively negotiated their time in prison. Yet although potentially empowering, the formal extension of officeholding to prisoners also represented the wider diffusion of early modern state power into prison populations and an attempt to exert greater social control over them. Indeed, this chapter challenges our view of early modern self-government – often understood as a mechanism of local autonomy and negotiation with higher powers – by discussing an extreme example in which participants could be actively involved in constricting their own liberty.
This chapter argues that contemporary electoral clientelism focused on vote buying is more vulnerable to failure than robust prior forms of political clientelism. Nineteenth- and early twentieth-century oligarchic clientelism, as well as mid twentieth-century corporatist clientelism, entangled the provision of benefits with employment and social protection. They thus raised the costs of defection so high that opposed recipients had strong incentives to comply. In contrast, contemporary electoral clientelism offers much lower-value gifts and limits the costs of noncompliance to foregone future benefits. Under these conditions, recipients’ personal political dispositions weigh more heavily in their vote choices, leading vote-buying attempts to fail when the conditions that I characterize in the rest of the book activate those dispositions. The chapter also describes Mexico’s transition from corporatist clientelism during most of the twentieth century under Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) rule to the new practice of electoral clientelism since national-level democratization in 2000.
This final chapter on mechanisms argues that recipients of electoral gifts have a partisan view of ballot secrecy. When opposition recipients only see machine representatives in their voting place on Election Day, they fear that ballot secrecy could be compromised and are more likely to believe the machine’s threats to impose costly sanctions for voting their sincere preferences. Recipient compliance is thus more likely in machine-dominant constituencies. When recipients also see opposing-party representatives at the polls, they are prone to believe that ballot secrecy is preserved and that they can vote their true preferences without incurring costs. This argument provides a new rationale for the protective influence of poll watchers and adds nuance to the standard institutional claim that de jure ballot secrecy alone undermines vote buying. Tests use observational survey data, survey experiments, and fieldwork in Mexico.
This introductory chapter describes the stakes of successful vote buying for new democracies and the deep pessimism of current perspectives. Despite the standard assumption embedded in existing theories that politicians only buy votes when the practice is guaranteed to be effective, meta-analyses of empirical research show that it typically fails. I introduce my partisan competition theory of electoral clientelism, which can better explain why vote-buying attempts success or fail. I argue that competitive elections can shift the balance of power from political machines to citizens, implying more optimistic outlook on elections, the voting behavior of poor citizens, and political representation in new democracies. Before outlining the remainder of the book, I introduce Mexico as a typical case of a new democracy awash in vote buying with subnational variation in the degree of partisan competition over time. I also introduce Argentina, Colombia, and Turkey as critical case tests of the mechanisms implied by the partisan competition theory.
The concluding chapter discusses the optimistic implications of my findings for the quality of elections, the voting behavior of poor citizens, the conceptualization of clientelist democracies, and the viability of political representation and accountability in new democracies. Vote buying still represents a drain on public budgets and inefficient social investment, but because competition makes poor voters more resistant to electoral clientelism than currently assumed, the electoral connection that underwrites democratic governance can operate in competitive constituencies. I draw out the public policy implications of my findings for opposition political parties, election management bodies, and democracy promotion efforts to fight vote buying and help transform clients into citizens.
This chapter tests the book’s main argument and the three proposed mechanisms by analyzing the effectiveness of vote-buying schemes in Argentina, Colombia, and Turkey. To avoid repetition, I highlight one mechanism per country, using a critical-case approach. In Colombia’s 2022 elections, weak partisanship and an atomized party system imply that recipients might respond instrumentally to electoral gifts. Nevertheless, using a conjoint experiment, I show strong partisan response, thus highlighting the low bar for partisan affinity to disrupt machine politics. Competitive authoritarianism in Turkey should bias elections in the incumbent’s favor, but I show that local competition for the Kurdish vote and intensive campaigns in the 2015 elections caused the incumbent party to target many unbuyable voters and made the vote buying strategy to fail nationally. Finally, in Argentina the use of partisan ballots should increase recipient compliance. Employing observational data and a photo-based survey experiment from the 2021 elections, I instead show that recipients believe in ballot secrecy and vote their true preferences where prior local electoral competition was vibrant but comply by voting for the machine where it had been locally dominant. The findings from these three critical-case tests show the surprisingly weak conditions that can make vote buying ineffective and imply that my argument generalizes to other competitive systems rife with clientelism.
This is the first of three chapters on the mechanisms that translate the effects of electoral competitiveness into the success or failure of vote buying. Here, I provide a new argument for recipients’ responses to vote-buying offers. Existing theory rooted in instrumentalist microfoundations predicts that all demographically similar voters respond equally to electoral gifts of a given value, thus making all voters potentially buyable. Drawing on the motivated reasoning literature in political science and the gifting literature in behavioral economics, I argue that responses to electoral gifts are conditioned by preexisting partisanship. Even though all recipients appreciate the gift’s economic value, partisans assign it different symbolic value due to inferences about the machine’s rationale for targeting them. Initial supporters respond positively, inferring that the machine cares about their welfare, whereas initial opponents respond negatively, inferring that the machine seeks to manipulate their vote. Partisan responses limit the market for votes by putting many opposed recipients out of the machine’s reach. Tests compare the predictions of standard “equal response” theory to my partisan response model using fieldwork observations, survey data, and conjoint experiments in Mexico.
This chapter provides a bookend test of my main hypothesis that the intensity of local electoral competition conditions the effectiveness of vote-buying attempts. I use specialized election-season panel surveys of Mexican citizens to assess the impact of electoral gifts on vote choices from the onset of national-level democracy in 2000 until 2018. Results show that vote buying typically fails in competitive constituencies and only succeeds where the machine was already electorally dominant for nonclientelist reasons. The rest of the chapter provides robustness tests. I use multiple approaches to measure vote-buying attempts, including direct and indirect self-reports from recipients and the PRI’s intent to treat constituencies with electoral gifts. Tests for endogeneity include sensitivity analysis and instrumental variables models, as well as time series and fixed effects models at the municipal level.
This second chapter on mechanisms argues that competitive elections cause machines to target many unbuyable voters with electoral gifts. Vote buying is effective when recipients vote for the machine but would have voted for a rival party had they not received a gift. Existing research shows that machines select clients based on citizens’ observable pre-campaign dispositions. Yet the unknowable effects of the subsequent campaigns can shift recipients’ vote-relevant attitudes enough to make some initially buyable voters unbuyable by Election Day. Machines in competitive constituencies thus make many unavoidable targeting errors. Campaign effects are muted in constituencies that the machine already dominates electorally, leading to more efficient targeting and more effective vote buying. Tests use a variety of measurement techniques and election-season panel surveys from Mexico between 2000 and 2018.
The year 2025 found Spain at the midpoint of the legislative term with increasing political weakness for the left-wing coalition government led by the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party and Sumar. Despite favourable macroeconomic indicators, corruption scandals involving senior Socialist figures, rhetorical rupture with investiture partners, and several legislative defeats contributed to a context of parliamentary fragility. The absence of a new national budget and growing discontent over the housing crisis further weakened the government’s position, although it remained in office and continued to pass some policy measures, such as an increase in the minimum wage. Meanwhile, the opposition intensified competition on the right ahead of the 2026 electoral cycle. Internationally, Spain adopted an active stance, especially regarding the war in Gaza and debates within NATO over defense spending.
In 2025, the federal election resulted in historic losses for the outgoing ‘traffic-light coalition’ and saw the return of the Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) to government. The election continued the trend towards even higher party system fragmentation. The Social Democratic Party (SPD) recorded its worst ever result (16.4%), while the Free Democratic Party (FDP) did not surpass the five-percent-threshold. The Alternative for Germany (AfD) became the second largest party (20.8%), and the Left regained relevance (8.8%). A grand coalition between CDU/CSU and SPD emerged as the only viable option but proved fragile. Following two years of recession, economic growth remained close to zero, and unemployment exceeded three million people. Migration and economic concerns dominated public debate, while the AfD continued to gain in the polls. The Hamburg state election confirmed the city’s status as an SPD stronghold, while the CDU, but also the Left and AfD gained considerably.
From the founding era to the turn of the twentieth century, Congress has at times asserted its power over elections robustly and creatively, even in periods of judicial obstruction, and its role in shaping the nation’s electoral landscape has always been pivotal – even when contested, uneven, or ineffective. This period invokes a rich and overlooked history that reveals a repository of federal authority over elections that was triggered (or ignored) less for reasons of federalism, and more so due to pragmatic, principled, or partisan considerations.
Voters’ experiences of winning or losing elections significantly influence their attitudes, particularly satisfaction with democracy, while other outcomes such as trust are less studied. Additionally, studies often rely on observational data, limiting causal conclusions about effects. We make three key contributions to this literature. First, we use a quasi-experimental design based on the implementation of the European Quality of Government Index Survey during elections across several European countries and regions to demonstrate causal effects of elections on trust. Second, we introduce a novel theoretical argument that voters of populist parties are especially sensitive to electoral outcomes. Third, we explore three ways to define ‘winners’ and ‘losers’: government/opposition status, vote margin changes, and results relative to recent polling. Our findings show that elections generally boost trust, with a pronounced winner-loser gap driven by winners, particularly when measured as entering government. Additionally, populist party voters exhibit greater sensitivity to these effects.
We examine the effectiveness of electoral propaganda in an autocracy, using Russia as a unique setting. Exploiting the unexpected release of a pro-regime propaganda video about Vladimir Putin shortly before the presidential election, we conducted a field experiment by randomly promoting the video to voters via a telephone survey and measuring self-reported voting behaviour after the election. Our results show that the pro-regime treatment successfully mobilized offline media consumers to vote for Putin, but failed to persuade online media users, and even backfired among respondents dissatisfied with the regime. Using electoral statistics for all major Russian cities and instrumenting public interest in the propaganda video with rainfall, we find a positive, albeit moderate, causal effect of the video on Putin’s vote share. As an alternative treatment, we used a viral anti-corruption video by opposition leader Alexei Navalny, which consistently undermined regime support among both offline and online media consumers.
This chapter investigates theorized claims about how politicians lobby and bargain with donors to achieve electoral advantages. Especially, it examines the correspondence between electoral geography and aid distribution over time in Malawi, Kenya, and Sierra Leone. The analysis shows how ruling parties have biased aid in favor of ruling party coalitions. Additionally, this chapter includes a case study analysis of how aid distribution in Kenya changed during the electoral transition from President Moi to President Kibaki in 2002.