How does clarity of alternatives affect the electoral fortune of corrupt politicians?

This article lays out a theoretical framework for understanding the effects of the clarity of alternatives on corruption voting. Traditional approximations to the question of why corrupt politicians win elections focus on the limited availability of information and voter biases toward in-group candi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Electoral studies 2022-06, Vol.77, p.102476, Article 102476
Main Author: Vera, Sofia B.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Accountability
Alternatives
Candidates
Clarity
Clarity of alternatives
Corruption
Elections
Electoral accountability
Ingroup bias
Politicians
Uncertainty
Voters
Voting
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This article lays out a theoretical framework for understanding the effects of the clarity of alternatives on corruption voting. Traditional approximations to the question of why corrupt politicians win elections focus on the limited availability of information and voter biases toward in-group candidates. I argue that while citizens are ready to punish corruption, the electoral toll for a corrupt candidate is reduced in settings of unclear electoral choices. I find support for this theoretical framework by examining the accountability enhancing consequences of the clarity of alternatives in Latin America. The results indicate that politicians running for office in settings of weak clarity of alternatives sustain less electoral damage than those running in settings of strong clarity of alternatives. The implication is that party decisions that increase voter uncertainty about the menu of choices contribute to the electoral fortune of corrupt politicians.
ISSN:0261-3794
1873-6890
DOI:10.1016/j.electstud.2022.102476