Party systems, that is, the number and the size of all the parties within a country, can vary greatly across countries. I conduct a principal component analysis on a party seat share dataset of 17 advanced democracies from 1970 to 2013 to reduce the dimensionality of the data. I find that the most important dimensions that differentiate party systems are: “the size of the biggest two parties” and the level of “competition between the two biggest parties.” I use the results to compare the changes in electoral and legislative party systems. I also juxtapose the results to previous party system typologies and party system size measures. I find that typologies sort countries into categories based on variation along both dimensions. On the other hand, most of the current political science literature use measures (e.g., the effective number of parties) that are correlated with the first dimension. I suggest that instead of these, indices that measure the opposition structure and competition could be used to explore problems pertaining to the competitiveness of the party systems.

One of the main questions about presidential democracies is to what extent the legislature influences executive governance. However, less well-known in this literature is the influence of opposition parties in policy-making and government formation processes. We argue that, in multiparty presidential governments, more concentrated opposition forces in the legislature, as opposed to more fragmented, lead to higher government spending and greater chances of coalition formation. Facing more united opposition, presidents who are concerned about passing their agenda in the legislature are willing to pay the price to hold their ruling party or governing coalition together in tighter unity. We test this logic by analyzing data on government spending and cabinet formation in all multiparty presidential democracies in East and Southeast Asia and find strong support for it, controlling for several political and economic variables. Our analysis further shows that chief executives' electoral incentives strongly shape their budget spending and cabinet appointments. | INTRODUCTIONIn recent years, there has been a growing interest in how multiparty presidential regimes operate. Once considered to be exceptionally fragile due to inherent inter-branch tensions (e.g.,

No abstract

We examine the rise and mobilizational dynamics of social democracy, employing data reported by the Swedish authorities on the distribution of voting eligibility, turnout and partisan vote in local elections during the 1910s at a high level of disaggregation (by narrow income segments and administrative units). In line with the existing literature, we show that electoral socialism depended on both the extension of the suffrage to its ‘natural’ electorate, that is, the urban working class, and the organizational capacity of trade unions and other civic associations. In addition, we show that socialist support was not uniform within the working class – even for a highly homogeneous society. Instead, the social-democratic vote was initially stronger among low- to middle-income workers, only expanding to poor voters later in time. We complement our local data with an interwar panel analysis of socialist vote and post-war survey data.