How Second-Order Is the Regional Level? An Analysis of Tweets in Simultaneous Campaigns

This article puts the second-order theory for regional elections to the test. Not by analysing voting behaviour but with the use of campaign data. The assumption that regional campaigns are overshadowed by national issues was verified by analysing the campaign tweets of Flemish politicians who ran for the regional or national parliament in the simultaneous elections of 2014. No proof was found for a hierarchy of electoral levels but politicians clearly mix up both levels in their tweets when elections coincide. The extent to which candidates mix up governmental levels can be explained by the incumbency past of the candidates, their regionalist ideology, and the political experience of the candidates.

[1]  S. Walgrave,et al.  Where Does Issue Ownership Come From? From the Party or from the Media? Issue-party Identifications in Belgium, 1991-2005 , 2007 .

[2]  Valentyna Romanova.  The Principle of Cyclicality of the Second-Order Election Theory for Simultaneous Multi-Level Elections , 2014 .

[3]  M. Keating,et al.  Multi-Level Electoral Competition , 2003 .

[4]  C. D. Vreese,et al.  Television reporting of second-order elections , 2003 .

[5]  James E. Piereson.  Presidential Popularity and Midterm Voting at Different Electoral Levels , 1975 .

[6]  P. Dumont,et al.  Party system(s) and electoral behaviour in Belgium: From stability to balkanisation , 2006 .

[7]  James E. Campbell.  Presidential Coattails and Midterm Losses in State Legislative Elections , 1986, American Political Science Review.

[8]  M. Broersma,et al.  SOCIAL MEDIA AS BEAT , 2012 .

[9]  Axel Bruns,et al.  HOW LONG IS A TWEET? MAPPING DYNAMIC CONVERSATION NETWORKS ON TWITTER USING GAWK AND GEPHI , 2012 .

[10]  Sanne Kruikemeier,et al.  How political candidates use Twitter and the impact on votes , 2014, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[11]  C. H. de Vreese,et al.  Second-Rate Election Campaigning? An Analysis of Campaign Styles in European Parliamentary Elections , 2009 .

[12]  C. Jeffery,et al.  Are Regional Elections really ‘Second-Order’ Elections? , 2013 .

[13]  Jens Tenscher.  A Matter of Timing? A Study of Regional Election Campaigns in Germany , 2014 .

[14]  R. Alba.  Interpreting the Parameters of Log-Linear Models , 1987 .

[15]  T. Carsey,et al.  State and national factors in gubernatorial and senatorial elections , 1998 .

[16]  Anders Olof Larsson,et al.  Studying political microblogging: Twitter users in the 2010 Swedish election campaign , 2012, New Media Soc..

[17]  Régis Dandoy,et al.  Introduction: Territoriality of the vote. A framework for analysis , 2013 .

[18]  John R. Petrocik.  Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study , 1996 .

[19]  Peter Van Aelst,et al.  Why political parties adapt to the media , 2013 .

[20]  Wilfried Swenden,et al.  New Directions in Federalism Studies , 2010 .

[21]  Bart Maddens,et al.  The Selection of Candidates for Eligible Positions on PR Lists: The Belgian/Flemish Federal Elections 1999–2010 , 2013 .

[22]  Susan Heixweg.  An examination of voter conceptualizations of the ideal political candidate , 1979 .

[23]  C. Devos,et al.  The Process of Rescaling Interests in the Belgian Context: The Impact of Regional Governmental Strength , 2014 .

[24]  H. Schmitt,et al.  NINE SECOND‐ORDER NATIONAL ELECTIONS – A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE ANALYSIS OF EUROPEAN ELECTION RESULTS , 1980 .

[25]  Kenneth Benoit,et al.  Coder Reliability and Misclassification in the Human Coding of Party Manifestos , 2012, Political Analysis.

[26]  Cameron D. Anderson.  Economic Voting and Multilevel Governance: A Comparative Individual‐Level Analysis , 2006 .

[27]  Charles W. Ostrom,et al.  The President, Referendum Voting, and Subnational Elections in the United States , 1991, American Political Science Review.