• Korean Journal of Legislative Studies
• /
• v.27 no.2
• /
• pp.5-40
• /
• 2021

In the 4.7 by-election in 2021, the ruling Democratic Party suffered a record devastating defeat, breaking the trend of a post-intermediate evaluation confirmed in the recent election. Why did the Democratic Party lose by a large margin unlike the recent election trend? In order to find answers to these questions, this study analyzes the voting behavior of individual voters based on the voter consciousness survey data conducted after the 4.7 by-election, while examining the background and causes of such voter choices. As a result of the study, in the 4.7 by-election, as confirmed in previous studies, public opinion against the ruling government was strong, and negative elections were held. However, if we look at the process and results of this by-election in more detail, we can see that it is different from the general by-election. In the past by-elections, the government judgement was due to the passive participation of the ruling party-oriented voters in elections with low political weight, or the active judgement psychology that was maximized in situations where the political burden was less. However, in this by-election, on the contrary, in an election with a high political weight, the active judgement psychology of the Democratic Party and non-partisan voters had an effect on strengthening the midterm evaluation character of the election. In addition, it can be seen that the gathering of conservative voters who support the opposition also had a strong influence on the reinforcement of the midterm evaluation character of the election.

• Analyses & Alternatives
• /
• v.6 no.2
• /
• pp.79-115
• /
• 2022

This study aims to account for electoral choice in the 2020 presidential election by focusing on social identity which forms the basis for core partisan groups. Two views compete to explain the origins of polarization, policy versus party. One emphasizes policy as more influential in choosing presidential candidates. This follows the tradition of retrospective voting theory in which voters' choice rely on government performance. Incumbent president whose performance proves well are rewarded to be reelected. Policy performance is based on measures around distinctive preferences for government spending. Republican Individuals prefer individual responsibility to government support, while Democratic counterparts support government support. Another perspective put an emphasis on the role partisanship which favors in-party members and disfavors partisan out-groups. Interparty animosity plays the key role in determining electoral behavior. This study relies on the Views of the Electorate Research (VOTER) Survey which provides a panel data of several waves from 2011 to 2020. A comparative evaluation of two views highlights three findings. First, policy matters. Policy preferences of voters are the primary drives of political behavior. Electoral outcomes in 2020 turned out to be the results of policy considerations of voters. 53.7 percent of voters tilted toward individual responsibility voted for Trump, whereas 70.4 percent of those favorable views of government support than individual responsibility voted for Biden. Thus effects of policy correspond to a positive difference of 26.4 percent points. Second, partisanship effects are of similar extent in influencing electoral choice of candidates: Democrats are less likely to vote for Trump by 42.4 percent points, while Republicans are less likely to vote for Biden by 48.7 percent points. Third, animosity of Republicans toward Democrat core groups creates 26.5 percent points of favoring Trump over Biden. Democrat animosity toward Republican core groups creates a positive difference of 13.7 percent points of favoring Biden.