![]() In this article, we study the effects of terrorism on incumbent electoral support and address this fundamental theoretical ambiguity. ![]() The ‘rally around the flag’ effect was first identified for US presidents in the case of wars, international crises and external attacks (Mueller Reference Mueller1970), but it has also been found to occur elsewhere and in reaction to not only international crises or terrorism, but different types of threatening events more generally, such as wildfires (Ramos and Sanz Reference Ramos and Sanz2020) or the COVID-19 pandemic (Bækgaard et al. In some circumstances, threatening events induce the so-called ‘rally around the flag’ effect: faced with external threats and uncertainty, citizens unite around the country's leadership and, as a result, incumbents get a popularity boost. However, we also know that terrorism does not always hurt incumbents. Moreover, this is often the case even with respect to events that are beyond the incumbents' direct control, such as terrorist attacks. Research in political behaviour consistently shows that voters generally hold the incumbent accountable for events that have a deleterious effect on their welfare. Will incumbent support increase or decrease as a consequence of terrorist activity? In standard retrospective voting models, the expectation tends to be the latter. This is why it is important to understand how voters react to terrorist attacks. One key channel through which political violence may exert its influence can be its impact on elections. Terrorist activity in democracies often seeks to influence the political system in order to advance its goals. In line with our theory, we find a more pronounced temporal heterogeneity for indiscriminate attacks and those that target civilians. Using data on all deadly domestic terrorist attacks in Spain between 19, matched with municipal-level national election results, we show how exposure to strikes that occur during the last quarter of the term benefit the incumbent, while more temporally distant attacks are electorally harmful. We reconcile these arguments and argue that while both effects can coexist, the retrospective assessment is more durable than the rally around the flag. However, the well-known ‘rally around the flag’ effect suggests otherwise: following a terrorist attack, voters often cling to the incumbent. Models of retrospective voting predict a negative impact, as terrorism is detrimental to voters' welfare. This article explores how it can influence the electoral fortunes of the incumbent. ![]() Terrorism often seeks to impact democratic politics.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |