Strategic Voting and Multinomial Choice In US Presidential Elections
AbstractRoss Perot was a relatively viable third party candidate in the 1992 US presidential election, but he was not any more in the 1996 election. This provides a good opportunity to analyze strategic voting behavior?voting for a candidate not most preferred by the voter?in the US presidential elections with panel data drawn from NES (National Election Studies). First, the 1992 election is analyzed with multinomial choice estimators. Second, using the estimates, each individual¡¯s choice is predicted for the 1996 election. Third, those who were predicted to vote for Perot in 1996 but did not are identified as strategic voters and their profile is drawn. In addition to the main task of analyzing the strategic voting behavior, this paper does two additional tasks. First, analyzing the 1992 data with multinomial choice estimators, t is found that the following variables mattered significantly for the US presidential election: respondent and candidate ideology, personal finance, age, education, income, sex, abortion stance, health insurance policy, and welfare program policy. Second, critical mistakes in the literature in applying multinomial probit to election data are pointed.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Institute of Economic Research, Korea University in its series Discussion Paper Series with number 0907.
Length: 25 pages
Date of creation: 2009
Date of revision:
strategic voting; presidential election; multinomial logit; multinomial probit;
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2009-04-05 (All new papers)
- NEP-CDM-2009-04-05 (Collective Decision-Making)
- NEP-DCM-2009-04-05 (Discrete Choice Models)
- NEP-POL-2009-04-05 (Positive Political Economics)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Train,Kenneth E., 2009.
"Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation,"
Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, November.
- McFadden, Daniel, 1989.
"A Method of Simulated Moments for Estimation of Discrete Response Models without Numerical Integration,"
Econometric Society, vol. 57(5), pages 995-1026, September.
- Daniel McFadden, 1987. "A Method of Simulated Moments for Estimation of Discrete Response Models Without Numerical Integration," Working papers 464, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- Hausman, Jerry A & Wise, David A, 1978.
"A Conditional Probit Model for Qualitative Choice: Discrete Decisions Recognizing Interdependence and Heterogeneous Preferences,"
Econometric Society, vol. 46(2), pages 403-26, March.
- J. A. Hausman & D. A. Wise, 1976. "A Conditional Profit Model for Qualitative Choice: Discrete Decisions Recognizing Interdependence and Heterogeneous Preferences," Working papers 173, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- Mueller,Dennis C., 2003. "Public Choice III," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521894753, November.
- Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
- Lee, Myoung-jae & Kim, Young-sook, 2007. "Multinomial choice and nonparametric average derivatives," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 63-81, January.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Kim, Jisoo).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.