1/ Will disputes over Nov 3rd divide America further?
A short thread summarizing what we know from research about risks of contentious elections, drawn from our 2015 Routledge book:
2/ 'Contentious elections’ are defined as contests involving major challenges, with different degrees of severity, to the legitimacy of electoral actors, procedures, or outcomes.
Here's the model we used to identify successive steps in the process...
3/ Evidence is needed to diagnose underlying symptoms...
4/ The risks of electoral violence are expected to be highest in hybrid regimes...lacking the deep legitimacy of established liberal democracies and also the willingness to deploy state coercion typical in repressive autocracies.
5/ This is indeed what we observed with the data:
6/ Though many factors contributed...especially the role of electoral procedures and impartial administration (see next for coding and measures)
7/ Coding and measures in the above...
8/ Finally, in 2014, we measured contentious elections cross-nationally, with the US rated low.
9/ But this is 2020, not 2014. US disputes are expected to deepen further after Nov 3, generating protests and endless court challenges.
The $64,0000 question is whether America becomes even more destabilized and polarized.
I hope for the best. And fear the worst.
10/ PS For the latest research, add this one to your booklist as well...
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Some cross-national evidence for anyone doubting the persistent link between diverse Authoritarian Populist leaders in executive office & subsequent democratic backsliding.
2/Republican voters are some of the most conservative towards abortion & homosexuality across 19 Western democracies; by contrast, Democrats are fairly mainstream.
3/ Attitudes towards abortion and homosexuality broken down by party voters across Western democracies.
2/ The book used data available from the 2014 CHES & the 2002-2014 ESS.
Are key predictions about socio-demographic cleavages in voting for Authoritarian-Populists demonstrated with newer data?
The analysis was updated using the 7th wave EVS/WVS 2017-21 & the 2019 GPS.
3/ Here's the book's core thesis. Social structural change in affluent societies led to the 'silent revolution' & rise of socially liberal values. This then triggered the backlash resentment among conservatives which was exploited by A-P parties.
The authors theorize that both rapid cultural change and economic pressure can create uncertain and dangerous threats leading to populism. But this both-sideism is the issue at the heart of the debate. Can both sides be right?
/2
Alas, the observational survey data relies on a single case-study of Spain, one of the worst affected by the '08 financial crisis.
To avoid conditioning, the study should ideally have compared a paired case which escaped the worst economic effects, like Sweden or Germany.
/3