Voters who support a candidate with little chance of winning an election face a choice: express their true preference and vote for the candidate they prefer, at the risk of “wasting” their vote, or vote strategically for another candidate more likely to win. This study examines this trade-off. In French parliamentary and departmental elections, candidates who qualify for the second round include the top two as well as any other candidate obtaining a share of the vote greater than 12.5% of registered voters. The results show that candidates who come third generally prefer to stay in the race rather than withdraw when they qualify. Moreover, a significant proportion of these candidates’ supporters vote for them expressively, rather than strategically rallying behind whichever of the top two candidates they prefer. This choice mainly harms whichever of the top two candidates is ideologically closest to the third candidate, and often causes their defeat. The non-strategic behaviour of voters and candidates is likely to influence the results of many other elections beyond those analysed in this study, such as European elections, which confront voters with similar trade-offs. The results suggest that parties with similar ideologies would benefit from reaching agreements to limit the number of candidates or lists they field. They also support the adoption of voting systems in which election results are less distorted by non-strategic choices made by voters and candidates.
Expressive voting and its consequences
This note seeks to show that voters often choose to use their vote to express their preference without regard to the election's likely outcome, and examines the consequences of this using data based exclusively on the analysis of official election results.
Reference Note IPP n°40
Presentation
Key Results
- The presence of a third candidate in the second round of French parliamentary and departmental elections increases voter turnout by 7.8 points and reduces the share of votes received by the top two candidates by 6.9 points.
- It mainly harms whichever of the top two candidates is ideologically closest to the third, causing their defeat in 19.2% of elections.
- While expressive voting is particularly consequential in majoritarian voting systems, it also influences the results of proportional voting systems, such as regional and European elections.
- The study indicates that parties with similar ideologies benefit from reaching agreements to limit the number of candidates in the race in order to avoid splitting the vote, and calls into question the use of the plurality rule for aggregating votes and reflecting citizens’ preferences.
Vincent Pons
Clémence Tricaud
Vestal McIntyre