The Spatial Theory of Electoral Competition

1
The Spatial Theory of Electoral Competition

• Melvin J. Hinich

2
The spatial theory of electoral competition
developed by Davis and Hinich (1966) rests on
the assumption that voter choices are functions
of the squared Euclidean distance between a
voters position in a political space and the
positions of the candidates (or parties)
standing for election.
3
Euclidean Distance Model
Suppose that there are N observers and M
targets. Each observer at position
reports the squared Euclidean distance
to the targets at locations
4
Latent Ideological Space
1 Issue positions cluster If I know what you
think on defense and environmental policy, I can
guess what you think of school lunch subsidies.
2 Shared meaning This clustering phenomenon is
not purely atomistic, so that ideological
positions such as liberal and conservative
have similar meanings to different people.
3 Constraint If the effective space of
political conflict is ideological in the sense
above , the strategies of candidates (and hence
the choices for voters) in the policy space are
highly constrained.
5
Squared Distances with Errors
For each error
6
Removing the Nonlinear Terms
The nonlinearity is removed by subtracting the
distances to one target, target m0 from the
distances to the other targets. Then compute the
sample covariance matrix of the distance
differences.
7
Assume that the errors
are independently identically distributed and
that they are independent of the observer
positions
8
Covariance Matrix of Distance Differences

• Assume that the observer positions xi1 xi2 are
  uncorrelated random variables whose variances are
  denoted

Then the covariance matrix of the
distance differences is
Mx2 matrix of target positions
9
(No Transcript)
10
Estimating the Loading Parameters
Sample Covariance Matrix
Factor analysis estimate of the loading matrix is
2D rotation matrix
11
(No Transcript)
12
(No Transcript)
13
2006 Private Survey
14
(No Transcript)
15
(No Transcript)
16
(No Transcript)
17
(No Transcript)
18
2001 Survey
A nation-wide representative survey of urban
population conducted during the chaotic weeks of
the second economic crisis of February 2001
1201 face-to-face interviews were conducted in
12 of the 81 provinces of Turkey
The survey was run during 2/20 3/16 using a
random sampling method that represents the
nationwide voting age urban population based on
the urban population figures of 1997 census data.
19
(No Transcript)
20
(No Transcript)
21
Basic Independent Variables
22
Vote Intentions for the November 3rd Election

• 29,4

• AKP

• 14,4

• CHP

• 9,9

• GP

• 5,0

• DYP

• 4,1

• MHP

• 3,3

• DEHAP

• 2,4

• ANAP

• 1,5

• SP

• 1,0

• YTP

• 0,7

• DSP

• 0,6

• BBP

• 1,3

• Other

• Will not vote

• 1,9

• Will not vote for the
• existing parties

• 7,1

• 8,7

• Undecided

• 8,7

• DK/NA

• 0

• 10

• 20

• 30

23
(No Transcript)
24
(No Transcript)
25
(No Transcript)
26
Xenophobia Political Efficacy

• Xenophobia
• Foreigners who settle in our country harm our
  culture.
• Foreigners who settle in our country make our
  chances of finding a job
• more difficult
• Some should either love Turkey or leave it.
• I would not want a foreigner to be my neighbor
• Political efficacy
• Regular citizens like me have no power for
  changing political decisions in Turkey for their
  advantage.
• Turkey is being ruled by a small and powerful
  group.
• Whatever I do I don't think I can reach a better
  position in society

27
(No Transcript)
28
(No Transcript)
29
Valence Question - Revitalizing the Economy
30
March-2004 survey of nation-wide representative
urban population (N1,232)
31
(No Transcript)
32
?
1st D. 2nd D. Alevis -1.5
-3.8 Non-Alevis 0.3 -1.7
33
Reformist Pro-EU Kurdish Nationalist
? DEHAP
? DSP
? CHP
HADEP
Prominent Businessman
? YTP
? GP
Very religious leader
FP

? ANAP
? SP
? MHP
CHP
? AKP
? BBP
DYP
Left Secularist Center
Right Pro-Islamist Periphery
? DYP
MHP
DSP
Status Quo Reactionary Anti-EU Turkish Nationalist
-AKP remains as the only credible party with
centrist positions and clear pro-EU stance
-CHP left the reformist, pro-EU camp as well as
its support concerning the protection and
advancement of the Kurdish minority rights. CHP
seems positioned to exploit anti-EU nationalist
rhetoric. -Right of center is back into its
original anti-EU position. CHP is likely to pull
them down on this axis. -Is the Turkish center
ready for another business take-over similar to
the GP in 2002?
2001
? 2002
? 2004