No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Partisan Leaning
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 March 2025
Abstract
A decisive voter’s exact ideological preferences can be hard to predict, even for seasoned candidates. We develop a novel theory of electoral competition where candidates are evaluated on ideological and nonideological dimensions. The key feature of our theory is that an electorate’s partisan leaning serves as a signal of the median voter’s ideological position where extreme leanings are more informative about voters than centrist leanings. We show that this leads to an endogenous sorting of districts between “extreme” and “centrist” and that an increase in the importance of candidate competence for voters increases polarization—but only in extreme districts. We evaluate our theory using data from mayoral elections in Brazil’s 95 largest municipalities and exploit COVID-19 as a shock to the salience of candidate competence. We show that COVID-19 increases the salience of competence in these elections, leading to increased political polarization, which is concentrated in cities with extreme partisan leanings.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of American Political Science Association
References
REFERENCES
Ajzenman, Nicolás, Cavalcanti, Tiago, and Da Mata, Daniel. 2023. “More than Words: Leaders’ Speech and Risky Behavior during a Pandemic.” American Economic Journal: Economic Policy 15 (3): 351–71.Google Scholar
Albert, Carla, Liberato, Johnny A., Mangrich, Elisiane B., and Stranz, Eduardo. 2020. “Pesquisa Sobre Covid-19: Foco Na Gestão Municipal E Apoio Dos Entes Federados.” CMN: Estudos Técnicos. https://cnm.org.br/biblioteca/download/4090Google Scholar
Alexander, Dan. 2021. “Uncontested Incumbents and Incumbent Upsets.” Games and Economic Behavior 126: 163–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Snyder, James M. Jr. 2000. “Valence Politics and Equilibrium in Spatial Election Models.” Public Choice 103 (3–4): 327–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Antràs, Pol, and Padró i Miquel, Gerard. 2011. “Foreign Influence and Welfare.” Journal of International Economics 84 (2): 135–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashworth, Scott, and Bueno de Mesquita, Ethan. 2009. “Elections with Platform and Valence Competition.” Games and Economic Behavior 67 (1): 191–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernhardt, Dan, Câmara, Odilon, and Squintani, Francesco. 2011. “Competence and Ideology.” Review of Economic Studies 78 (2): 487–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernhardt, Dan, Duggan, John, and Squintani, Francesco. 2007. “Electoral Competition with Privately-Informed Candidates.” Games and Economic Behavior 58 (1): 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernhardt, Dan, Duggan, John, and Squintani, Francesco. 2009. “The Case for Responsible Parties.” American Political Science Review 103 (4): 570–87.Google Scholar
Boas, Taylor C. 2014. “Pastor Paulo vs. Doctor Carlos: Professional Titles as Voting Heuristics in Brazil.” Journal of Politics in Latin America 6 (2): 39–72.Google Scholar
Bonica, Adam. 2013. “Ideology and Interests in the Political Marketplace.” American Journal of Political Science 57 (2): 294–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruce, Raphael, Cavgias, Alexsandros, Meloni, Luis, and Remígio, Mário. 2022. “Under Pressure: Women’s Leadership during the COVID-19 Crisis.” Journal of Development Economics 154: 102761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2021.102761Google ScholarPubMed
Bueno de Mesquita, Ethan, and Tyson, Scott A.. 2020. “The Commensurability Problem: Conceptual Difficulties in Estimating the Effect of Behavior on Behavior.” American Political Science Review 114 (2): 375–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buisseret, Peter, and Van Weelden, Richard. 2022. “Polarization, Valence, and Policy Competition.” American Economic Review: Insights 4 (3): 341–52.Google Scholar
Callander, Steven, and Carbajal, Juan Carlos. 2022. “Cause and Effect in Political Polarization: A Dynamic Analysis.” Journal of Political Economy 130 (4): 825–80.Google Scholar
Callander, Steven, and Wilkie, Simon. 2007. “Lies, Damned Lies, and Political Campaigns.” Games and Economic Behavior 60 (2): 262–86.Google Scholar
Callaway, Brantly, Goodman-Bacon, Andrew, and SantAnna, Pedro H. C.. 2024. “Difference-in-Differences with a Continuous Treatment.” NBER Working Paper 32117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calvert, Randall L. 1985. “Robustness of the Multidimensional Voting Model: Candidate Motivations, Uncertainty, and Convergence.” American Journal of Political Science 29 (1): 69–95.Google Scholar
Catalinac, Amy. 2018. “Positioning under Alternative Electoral Systems: Evidence from Japanese Candidate Election Manifestos.” American Political Science Review 112 (1): 31–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chauvin, Juan P., and Tricaud, Clemence. 2024. “Gender, Electoral Incentives, and Crisis Response: Evidence from Brazilian Mayors.” NBER Working Paper 32410.Google Scholar
Clark, Tom S. 2009. “Measuring Ideological Polarization on the United States Supreme Court.” Political Research Quarterly 62 (1): 146–57.Google Scholar
CNT, Confederação Nacional do Transporte. 2020. “Pesquisa De Opinião CNT/MDA – Round 147.” https://bit.ly/4gJgOpC.Google Scholar
Cox, Gary W., and Katz, Jonathan N.. 1996. “Why Did the Incumbency Advantage in U.S. House Elections Grow?” American Journal of Political Science 40 (2): 478–97.Google Scholar
D’Haultfœuille, Xavier, Hoderlein, Stefan, and Sasaki, Yuya. 2023. “Nonparametric Difference-in-Differences in Repeated Cross-Sections with Continuous Treatments.” Journal of Econometrics 234 (2): 664–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Desai, Zuheir. Forthcoming. “A Theory of Electoral Competition in Developing Democracies.” Journal of Politics.Google Scholar
Desai, Zuheir, and Frey, Anderson. 2023. “Can Descriptive Representation Help the Right Win Votes From the Poor? Evidence from Brazil.” American Journal of Political Science 67 (3): 671–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Desai, Zuheir, and Tyson, Scott A.. Forthcoming. “Demanding More Than What You Want.” Political Science Research and Methods.Google Scholar
Desai, Zuheir, Frey, Anderson, and Tyson, Scott A.. 2025. “Replication Data for: Partisan Leaning.” Harvard Dataverse. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/1JMXYN.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Desposato, Scott W. 2006. “Parties for Rent? Ambition, Ideology, and Party Switching in Brazil’s Chamber of Deputies.” American Journal of Political Science 50 (1): 62–80.Google Scholar
Di Lonardo, Livio. 2017. “Valence Uncertainty and the Nature of the Candidate Pool in Elections.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 29 (2): 327–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eggers, Andrew C., and Spirling, Arthur. 2018. “The Shadow Cabinet in Westminster Systems: Modeling Opposition Agenda Setting in the House of Commons, 1832–1915.” British Journal of Political Science 48 (2): 343–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P., and Abrams, Samuel J.. 2008. “Political Polarization in the American Public.” Annual Review of Political Science 11: 563–88.Google Scholar
Groseclose, Tim. 2001. “A Model of Candidate Location When One Candidate Has a Valence Advantage.” American Journal of Political Science 45 (4): 862–86.Google Scholar
Hunter, Wendy, and Power, Timothy J.. 2007. “Rewarding Lula: Executive Power, Social Policy, and the Brazilian Elections of 2006.” Latin American Politics and Society 49 (1): 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE). 2010. “Censo Demográfico.” https://sidra.ibge.gov.br/pesquisa/censo-demografico/demografico-2010/inicial.Google Scholar
Invernizzi, Giovanna M. 2023. “Antagonistic Cooperation: Factional Competition in the Shadow of Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 67 (2): 426–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kartik, Navin, and Preston McAfee., R. 2007. “Signaling Character in Electoral Competition.” American Economic Review 97 (3): 852–70.Google Scholar
Klašnja, Marko, and Titiunik, Rocío. 2017. “The Incumbency Curse: Weak Parties, Term Limits, and Unfulfilled Accountability.” American Political Science Review 111 (1): 129–48.Google Scholar
Laver, Michael, Benoit, Kenneth, and Garry, John. 2003. “Extracting Policy Positions from Political Texts Using Words as Data.” American Political Science Review 97 (2): 311–31.Google Scholar
Lupu, Noam. 2016. “Building Party Brands in Argentina and Brazil.” In Challenges of Party-Building in Latin America, eds. Levitsky, Steven, Loxton, James, Van Dyck, Brandon, and Dominguez, Jorge I., 76–99. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matakos, Konstantinos, Troumpounis, Orestis, and Xefteris, Dimitrios. 2016. “Electoral Rule Disproportionality and Platform Polarization.” American Journal of Political Science 60 (4): 1026–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarty, Nolan, Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 2016. Polarized America: The Dance of Ideology and Unequal Riches. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Milosh, Maria, Painter, Marcus, Sonin, Konstantin, Van Dijcke, David, and Wright, Austin L.. 2021. “Unmasking Partisanship: Polarization Undermines Public Response to Collective Risk.” Journal of Public Economics 204: 104538. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2021.104538Google Scholar
Motolinia, Lucia. 2021. “Electoral Accountability and Particularistic Legislation: Evidence from an Electoral Reform in Mexico.” American Political Science Review 115 (1): 97–113.Google Scholar
Paine, Jack, and Tyson, Scott A.. 2020. “Uses and Abuses of Formal Models in Political Science.” In The SAGE Handbook of Political Science, eds. Berg-Schlosser, Dirk, Badie, Bertrand, and Morlino, Leonardo, 188–202. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pereira, Leila Albuquerque. 2021. “Electoral Competition and Platform Choice: A Computational Linguistics Approach Based on Brazilian Data.” PhD diss. Insper—Institute of Education and Research.Google Scholar
Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 1984. “The Polarization of American Politics.” Journal of Politics 46 (4): 1061–79.Google Scholar
Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 2000. Congress: A Political-Economic History of Roll Call Voting. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Power, Timothy J., and Rodrigues-Silveira, Rodrigo. 2019. “Mapping Ideological Preferences in Brazilian Elections, 1994–2018: A Municipal-Level Study.” Brazilian Political Science Review 13: 1–27.Google Scholar
Power, Timothy J., and Zucco, Cesar. 2009. “Estimating Ideology of Brazilian Legislative Parties, 1990–2005: A Research Communication.” Latin American Research Review 44 (1): 218–46.Google Scholar
Power, Timothy J., and Zucco, Cesar. 2012. “Elite Preferences in a Consolidating Democracy: The Brazilian Legislative Surveys, 1990–2009.” Latin American Politics and Society 54 (4): 1–27.Google Scholar
Pulejo, Massimo, and Querubín, Pablo. 2021. “Electoral Concerns Reduce Restrictive Measures during the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Journal of Public Economics 198: 104387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2021.104387Google ScholarPubMed
Roemer, John E. 1997. “Political–Economic Equilibrium When Parties Represent Constituents: The Unidimensional Case.” Social Choice and Welfare 14 (4): 479–502.Google Scholar
Samuels, David J., and Zucco, Cesar. 2018. Partisans, Antipartisans, and Nonpartisans: Voting Behavior in Brazil. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sasso, Greg, Judd, Gleason, and Steel, Reilly. 2024. “Electoral Competition with Targeted Voting Costs.” SocArXiv. https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/gsb3r_v1Google Scholar
Secretaria do Tesouro Nacional (STN). 2009–2012. “FinanÇas Municipais (FINBRA) Pre-2013.” https://www.tesourotransparente.gov.br/publicacoes/finbra-dados-contabeis-dos-municipios-1989-a-2012/2012/26.Google Scholar
Secretaria do Tesouro Nacional (STN). 2013–2020. “FinanÇas Municipais (FINBRA).” https://siconfi.tesouro.gov.br/siconfi/pages/public/consulta_finbra/finbra_list.jsf.Google Scholar
Slough, Tara, and Tyson, Scott A.. 2023. “External Validity and Meta-Analysis.” American Journal of Political Science 67 (2): 440–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slough, Tara, and Tyson, Scott A.. 2024. External Validity and Evidence Accumulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolvanen, Juha, Tremewan, James, and Wagner, Alexander K.. 2022. “Ambiguous Platforms and Correlated Preferences: Experimental Evidence.” American Political Science Review 116 (2): 734–50.Google Scholar
Tribunal Superior Eleitoral (TSE). 2010–2020. “Portal De Dados Abertos.” https://dadosabertos.tse.jus.br/.Google Scholar
Tribunal Superior Eleitoral (TSE). 2012–2020. “DivulgaÇão De Candidaturas.” https://divulgacandcontas.tse.jus.br/divulga/#/home.Google Scholar
Watanabe, Kohei, and Baturo, Alexander. 2024. “Seeded Sequential LDA: A Semi-Supervised Algorithm for Topic-Specific Analysis of Sentences.” Social Science Computer Review 42 (1): 224–48.Google Scholar
Wilkerson, John, and Casas, Andreu. 2017. “Large-Scale Computerized Text Analysis in Political Science: Opportunities and Challenges.” Annual Review of Political Science 20: 529–44.Google Scholar
Wittman, Donald. 1983. “Candidate Motivation: A Synthesis of Alternative Theories.” American Political Science Review 77 (1): 142–57.Google Scholar
Desai et al. supplementary material
Desai et al. supplementary material
File
276 KB
Comments
No Comments have been published for this article.