Everything is Uncertain and Uncertainty is Everything: Strategic Voting in Simple Plurality Elections.

Intuition tells us that strategic voting is most likely in marginal constituencies where the preferred party is a long way behind the second placed parity. Some formal theories suggest there should be complete desertion of all but two candidates (Palfrey 1989), or additionally that the second and third will have similar vote shares (Cox 1997). Unfortunately, these theories fail to account for uncertainty over the strength of candidates. We present a model that allows for such uncertainty. It generates interesting and original comparative statics. All three approaches are tested against English voting data from 1987, 1992 and 1997. Our model fits the data; the standard intuition and Cox hypothesis do not. Thus formal theory can improve on intuition. But, this depends on the realization that voters are uncertain, and it is only uncertainty that matters for strategic voting.

[1]  M. Duverger Political Parties Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State , 1964 .

[2]  Thomas R. Palfrey,et al.  A mathematical proof of Duverger's Law , 1988 .

[3]  G. Cox Strategic Voting Equilibria under the Single Nontransferable Vote , 1994, American Political Science Review.

[4]  Cox Making Votes Count , 1997 .

[5]  Anthony F. Heath Understanding Political Change: The British Voter 1964-1987 , 1991 .

[6]  David Sanders,et al.  On Message: Communicating the Campaign , 1999 .

[7]  A Tactical Error in the Analysis of Tactical Voting: A Response to Niemi, Whitten and Franklin , 1993 .

[8]  John H. Aldrich,et al.  “Sophisticated” Voting in the 1988 Presidential Primaries , 1992, American Political Science Review.

[9]  Bruce E. Cain,et al.  Strategic voting in Britain , 1978 .

[10]  R. Niemi,et al.  Constituency Characteristics, Individual Characteristics and Tactical Voting in the 1987 British General Election , 1992, British Journal of Political Science.

[11]  Anthony Heath,et al.  Tactical Voting: Concepts, Measurement and Findings , 1994 .

[12]  R. Weber,et al.  A Theory of Voting Equilibria , 1993, American Political Science Review.

[13]  Dale T. Hoffman,et al.  A MODEL FOR STRATEGIC VOTING , 1982 .

[14]  People Who Live in Glass Houses … , 1989 .

[15]  W. Riker,et al.  A Theory of the Calculus of Voting , 1968, American Political Science Review.

[16]  D. Green,et al.  Pathologies of Rational Choice Theory: A Critique of Applications in Political Science , 1994 .

[17]  The Two Faces of Tactical Voting , 1994 .

[18]  E. Fieldhouse,et al.  Tactical Voting and Party Constituency Campaigning at the 1992 General Election in England , 1996, British Journal of Political Science.

[19]  Ruth C. Silva,et al.  Making votes count , 1963 .

[20]  Robin Farquharson,et al.  Theory of voting , 1969 .

[21]  David P. Myatt A NEW THEORY OF STRATEGIC VOTING , 2000 .

[22]  Mark Fey,et al.  Stability and Coordination in Duverger's Law: A Formal Model of Preelection Polls and Strategic Voting , 1997, American Political Science Review.

[23]  André Blais,et al.  Measuring strategic voting: A two-step procedure , 1996 .