Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Mini-Conference
Browse By Division
Browse By Session or Event Type
Browse Sessions by Fields of Interest
Browse Papers by Fields of Interest
Search Tips
Conference
Location
About APSA
Personal Schedule
Change Preferences / Time Zone
Sign In
X (Twitter)
While previous works do not take into account time inconsistency in party positions, party positions are changeable rather than fixed. Contrary to these existing studies emphasizing the impact of electoral institutions on political representation, I delve into the fluctuation in citizens’ perception of under-representation. The focus shifts to the dynamic nature of party positions, driven by the pursuit of re-election. Parties strategically adjust their ideological positions to align with voter positions, which is ideological congruence. If the incumbent party has experienced losing some of their voters in the previous election, they modify their policy position to get back the leavers. Building upon the literature on changes in party position-taking, I propose that ideological congruence varies by the degree of electoral closeness in the previous election. More electoral closeness means that the incumbent party barely won in the previous election with a small vote margin. In other words, it indicates that the previous election was competitive. If the incumbent party has small vote margins in the previous election, they will shift to voter’s positions to stay in power. As a result, the ideological distance between parties and voters will decline. On the other hand, if the level of election closeness is low, the incumbent party won the seat with a large vote margin in the past election. As the past election was less competitive, the incumbent party will have low incentives to align with voters for reelection. Consequently, there will be a low degree of ideological congruence. The intricate relationship between electoral closeness and ideological congruence offers insights into party behavior, democratic accountability, and the dynamics of electoral competition.