Meet in the Middle: Terrorism and Centrist Party Vote Shares in Legislative Elections
| Author | Lance Y. Hunter,Aaron Hutton,Joseph W. Robbins,Martha H. Ginn |
| Date | 01 February 2019 |
| Published date | 01 February 2019 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12637 |
Meet in the Middle: Terrorism and Centrist
Party Vote Shares in Legislative Elections
Lance Y. Hunter
Augusta University
Joseph W. Robbins
Valdosta State University
Martha H. Ginn and Aaron Hutton
Augusta University
Abstract
Scholars have found that terrorism can influence political behavior in democracies by affecting citizens’emotions such as anxi-
ety and fear. However, researchers have yet to examine how terrorism affects vote choice cross-nationally. The few studies
that have investigated terrorism’s effect on vote choice have only examined single states through case study analysis. While
informative, researchers lack an understanding regarding how terrorism influences vote choice cross-nationally based on the
nature of terrorist attacks and the ideology of political parties. Thus, using a unique dataset that incorporates political party
ideology, this study examines the effect the number and severity of terrorist attacks have on vote choice in legislative elec-
tions in 56 democracies from multiple regions and levels of development from 1975 to 2014. Preliminary results indicate that
terrorist attacks are critical events that significantly affect vote choice in the democratic states included in this analysis.
Policy Implications
•Terrorism influences political behavior, therefore governments should develop and communicate sensible counterterrorism
policies to maintain electoral stability.
•Terrorism increases centrist parties vote shares suggesting that counterterrorism policies gravitating toward hawkish or
dovish ends may be met with skepticism by voters.
•Both right and leftist parties lose electoral support if they are governing during increases in terrorism. To minimize elec-
toral losses, they should develop pragmatic counterterrorism proposals that address security concerns while avoiding reac-
tionary policies.
•Rightist parties suffer the most electorally following both international and domestic attacks and leftist parties lose support
following domestic attacks. This suggests that parties should tailor their counterterrorism proposals and messaging
depending on the type of the attack.
A common and widely held assumption in electoral politics
is that center-right and far-right political parties should per-
form better in elections following increases in terrorism. The
logic is based on the notion that rightist parties often pre-
sent voters with stronger security-based policy proposals in
response to terrorist attacks which voters gravitate toward
in an environment where their security is seemingly threat-
ened. However, this claim has not been investigated or
tested in democracies cross-nationally. We contend that cen-
trist parties, rather than rightist parties or leftist parties,
should increase their vote shares to a greater degree follow-
ing terrorist attacks. To test our argument we analyze the
effect the number, severity, and type of terrorist attacks
have on the percentage of vote shares received by political
parties of the left, right and center in legislative elections in
56 democracies in Africa, Asia, the OECD, Europe, Latin
America, the Middle East and North America from 1975 to
2014. We contend that center parties are more likely to
increase their vote shares in legislative elections following
increases in terrorism for three primary reasons. First, we
contend that following terrorist attacks voters are more
likely to reassess their political attachments and consider
voting for moderate and non-governing parties due to the
emotional and psychological effects created by terrorism.
Second, we argue that following terrorist attacks voters are
more likely to punish governing parties and parties of simi-
lar ideologies, for their perceived failure to protect the secu-
rity of the state and centrist parties are rarely governing
parties and thus become more viable political options fol-
lowing terrorist attacks. Lastly, following increases in
©2019 University of Durham and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Global Policy (2019) 10:1 doi: 10.1111/1758-5899.12637
Global Policy Volume 10 . Issue 1 . February 2019
60
Research Article
To continue reading
Request your trial