El propósito de este artículo es reportar los resultados de la elección presidencial y legislativa de Chile en 2017 y explorar su efecto sobre el sistema de partidos. Relata el contexto, y sugiere que hubo tres temas recurrentes que definieron tanto la nominación de los candidatos como el tono de la campaña: una importante polarización política, dos grandes escándalos de corrupción y el debut de un nuevo sistema electoral. Presenta a los candidatos presidenciales y sus principales bases de apoyo. Describe los puntos medulares de la elección y las principales estrategias electorales. Repasa los resultados de la elección, los analiza y los interpreta. Destaca el inédito fraccionamiento en el sistema de partidos provocado por el contexto político e institucional de los últimos años. Sugiere que a partir de 2018 el sistema de partidos está en uno de sus niveles más fragmentados de su historia. Especula que hacia delante los próximos gobiernos serán más flexibles que los anteriores y buscarán pasar legislación sobre la base de negociaciones y pactos multilaterales.

No abstract

Artículos CienCia PolítiCa Incumbency AdvAntAge And tenure Length In the chILeAn chAmber of deputIes, 1989-2009* 1

No abstract

This article applies the debate on the recent emergence of outsider candidates in Latin America to independent presidential candidate Marco Enríquez-Ominami (ME-O) in Chile in 2009. We test five competing hypotheses to explain his electoral success. First, his support is explained by the consolidation of democracy, reflected by the disposition of voters to disregard the authoritarian/democratic-aligned candidates. Second, his support is explained by the decline of ideological identification, reflected by the disposition of voters to prefer nontraditional candidates. Third, his support is explained by the resurgence of the Left, reflected by the disposition of voters to identify with anti-Washington Consensus candidates. Fourth, his support is explained by the demand for quick government action, reflected in the predisposition of voters to consider candidates who will solve problems fast even if they do not ask voters for their opinions. Fifth, his support is explained by the declining support for established parties, reflected by the predisposition of voters to favor antisystemic candidates. We use survey data to test these hypotheses. We find no evidence to support the claims that ME-O fits any of the explanations. Though he was widely referred to as an outsider, his success seems to respond to national affairs rather than to a regional pattern.