Se ha denunciado esta presentación.
Utilizamos tu perfil de LinkedIn y tus datos de actividad para personalizar los anuncios y mostrarte publicidad más relevante. Puedes cambiar tus preferencias de publicidad en cualquier momento.

Global Voting Trends - Presidential elections

638 visualizaciones

Publicado el

This presentation analyzes global voting trends in presidential systems worldwide

Publicado en: Noticias y política
  • Inicia sesión para ver los comentarios

  • Sé el primero en recomendar esto

Global Voting Trends - Presidential elections

  1. 1. GLOBAL VOTING TRENDS WAPOR 70th Annual Conference Lisbon, 16 July 2017 David Iglesias & Sara Morais Analysis of Presidential elections
  2. 2. Turnout evolution in presidential systems Source: own analysis from IDEA’s Voter Turnout Database • In the last 50 years, turnout in presidential systems in Europe has decreased progressively. The sharpest drop was registered in the 90’s, after the fall of the Berlin Wall. • Turnout in the US has also gone down since the 70’s. • It has gone up in Latin America, where the majority of countries have laws of compulsory voting.
  3. 3. Runoff presidential elections: neck & neck Distance between the winner and the 2nd candidate in presidential elections with runoff Source: own. Without invalid and blank votes. • Half of the last presidential elections with runoff the victory margin was less than 5 points. • In 2016 and 2017 the final distance was 1,8 (excluding the exception of France). • The closeness of results in Austria forced the repetition of the runoff. * The elections were repeated Country Date 1st % 2nd % Difference Peru 5-Jun-16 Pedro P. Kuczynski 50,1 Keiko Fujimori 49,9 0,2 El Salvador 9-Mar-14 Salvador S. Cerén 50,1 Norman Quijano 49,9 0,2 Austria 22-May-16 A. Van der Bellen 50,4 Norbert Hofer 49,7 0,7 Ecuador 2-Apr-17 Lenín Moreno 51,2 Guillermo Lasso 48,8 2,3 Argentina 22-Nov-15 Mauricio Macri 51,3 Daniel Scioli 48,7 2,7 Poland 24-May-15 Andrzej Duda 51,6 B. Komorowski 48,5 3,1 Brazil 26-Oct-14 Dilma Rousseff 51,6 Aécio Neves 48,4 3,3 Moldova 13-Nov-16 Igor Dodon 52,1 Maia Sandu 47,9 4,2 Colombia 15-Jun-14 Juan M. Santos 53,1 Iván Zuluaga 46,9 6,2 Austria* 4-Dec-16 A. Van der Bellen 53,8 Norbert Hofer 46,2 7,6 Romania 16-Nov-14 Klaus Iohannis 54,4 Victor Ponta 45,6 8,9 Uruguay 30-Nov-14 Tabaré Vázquez 56,6 Luis Lacalle 43,4 13,2 Chile 15-Dec-13 Michelle Bachelet 62,2 Evelyn Matthei 37,8 24,3 Guatemala 25-Oct-15 Jimmy Morales 65,5 Sandra Torres 34,5 31,0 France 7-May-17 Emmanuel Macron 66,1 Marine Le Pen 33,9 32,2 Costa Rica 6-Apr-14 Luis G. Solís 77,8 Johnny Araya 22,2 55,6
  4. 4. One-round Presidential elections Distance between the winner and the 2nd candidate in presidential elections without runoff Source: own • The distance between the first and the second in votes widens in presidential elections being decided in one round, jumping to 15.6 points. Country Date 1st % 2nd % Difference Total Venezuela 14-Apr-13 Nicolás Maduro 50,6 Henrique Capriles 49,1 1,5 99,7 United States 8-Nov-16 Hillary Clinton 48,2 Donald Trump 46,1 2,1 94,3 Mexico 1-Jul-12 E. Peña Nieto 38,2 Andrés Manuel LO 31,6 6,6 69,8 Panama 4-May-14 Juan C. Varela 39,1 José D. Arias 31,4 7,7 70,5 Honduras 24-Nov-13 Juan O. Hernández 36,9 Xiomara Castro 28,8 8,1 65,7 Paraguay 21-Apr-13 Horacio Cartes 45,8 Efraín Alegre 37,1 8,7 83,0 Nigeria 28-Mar-15 Muhammadu Buhari 54,0 Goodluck Jonathan 45,0 9,0 98,9 Philippines 9-May-16 Rodrigo Duterte 39,0 Mar Roxas 23,5 15,6 62,5 South Korea 9-May-17 Moon Jae-in 41,1 Hong Jun-pyo 24,0 17,1 65,1 Dom. Rep. 15-May-16 Danilo Medina 61,7 Luis Abinader 35,0 26,8 96,7 Portugal 24-Jan-16 M. Rebelo de Sousa 52,0 António Sampaio 22,9 29,1 74,9 Bolivia 12-Oct-14 Evo Morales 61,4 Samuel Doria 24,2 37,1 85,6 Ukraine 25-May-14 Petro Poroshenko 54,7 Yulia Tymoshenko 12,8 41,9 67,5 Russia 4-Mar-12 Vladimir Putin 63,6 Gennady Zyuganov 17,2 46,4 80,8 Nicaragua 6-Nov-16 Daniel Ortega 72,4 Maximino Rodríguez 15,0 57,4 87,5
  5. 5. Too close to call This new reality becomes more challenging for pollsters, in a context in which surgically accurate predictions are expected from surveys. • In 2016 in the US, the IBD/TIPP tracking gave a match between Clinton and Trump in the previous days to the election. Poll for the 2016 presidential election in Peru IBD/TIPP tracking for the 2016 USA election Source: media Source: own, from the results of the IBD/TIPP tracking
  6. 6. Last minute decision – blackout periods • The closeness in the outcome make very important last minute decision voting changes. • Blackout periods become the main hurdle for polling firms. This situation becomes even more problematic in many presidential systems, especially in Latin America, where most countries have some of the largest blackout periods worldwide. Source: own analysis with own research and ACE electoral Project database
  7. 7. Last minute decision – blackout periods Source: own research Country Blackout Runoff Reelection Compulsory Registry Brazil 0 Yes Yes Yes Yes USA 0 No Yes No Yes. Private Austria 0 Yes Yes No Yes UK 0 No Yes No Yes. Private Germany 0 No Yes No No Canada 0 No Yes No Yes* France 1 Yes Yes No Yes Portugal 1 Yes Yes No Yes Argentina 2 Yes Yes Yes Yes Uruguay 2 Yes No Yes No Australia 3 No Yes Yes No Costa Rica 3 Yes No Yes Yes Mexico 3 No No Yes Yes Spain 5 No Yes No No Bolivia 6 Yes Yes Yes Yes Peru 6 Yes No Yes Yes Colombia 7 Yes No No Yes Venezuela 7 No Yes No No Ecuador 10 Yes Yes Yes Yes Chile 15 Yes No/Yes No No El Salvador 15 Yes No No No Guatemala 15 Yes No Yes No Paraguay 15 No No Yes No Italy 15 No Yes No Yes Panamá 20 No No Yes Yes Honduras 30 No No Yes Yes Nicaragua NA No Yes No No Dom. Rep. NA Yes Yes Yes No
  8. 8. Last minute voters in US elections • National polls for the US election did not fail in their estimations, as a thorough review carried out by the AAPOR shows*. However, there was more uncertainty at the state level in the race for the Electoral College. “The polls on average indicated that Trump was one state away from winning the election”, goes on the aforementioned study. • One of the reasons accounting for an under-estimation “of Trump’s support in the Upper Midwest” might be last minute changes among voters in some key states. “About 13 percent of voters in Wisconsin, Florida and Pennsylvania decided on their presidential vote choice in the final week”. • The US becomes thus an excellent example of this global trend being discussed of voters delaying more and more their voting decision. Time of decision and presidential vote in key states won by Trump * Source: “An evaluation of 2016 election polls in the United States”; American Association for Public Opinion Research. May 4, 2017 Source: Washington Post
  9. 9. Big cities VS rest of the country • Another global trend that is also true for presidential systems is the growing gap in voting patterns between big cities and the rest of the country. • This tendency is not recent in the US, but in the 2016 election showed remarkable numbers. Source: New York Times Shift in margin in the 2016 US election