Abstention, Protest, and Residual Votes in the 2016 Election
Name
SSRN-id3498612.pdf
Description
Accepted version
Size
1.86 MB
Format
Adobe PDF
Checksum (MD5)
4961bf5c22a3c4092fe44b41b2cc16eb
Author(s)
Stewart III, Charles H
Alvarez, R. Michael
Pettigrew, Stephen S.
Wimpy, Cameron
Date Issued
March 2020
Journal
Social Science Quarterly
Publisher
Wiley
Citation
Stewart III, Charles et al. "Abstention, Protest, and Residual Votes in the 2016 Election." Social Science Quarterly 101, 2 (March 2020): 925-939 © 2019 by the Southwestern Social Science Association
Version
Author's final manuscript
Abstract
Objective: We analyze the significant increase in the residual vote rate in the 2016 presidential election. The residual vote rate, which is the percentage of ballots cast in a presidential election that contain no vote for president, rose nationwide from 0.99 to 1.41 percent between 2012 and 2016. Method: We use election return data and public opinion data to examine why the residual vote rate increased in 2016. Results: The primary explanation for this rise is an increase in abstentions, which we argue results primarily from disaffected Republican voters rather than alienated Democratic voters. In addition, other factors related to election administration and electoral competition explain variation in the residual vote rates across states, particularly the use of mail/absentee ballots and the lack of competition at the top of the ticket in nonbattleground states. However, we note that the rise in the residual vote rate was not due to changes in voting technologies. Conclusion: Our research has implications for the use of the residual vote as a metric for studying election administration and voting technologies.
MIT Department
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Political Science
Terms of Use
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike
Persistent DSpace Link
DOI of Published Version
https://doi.org/10.1111/SSQU.12757
