Abstract
This paper tests four hypotheses of "losers' consent"-that is, the extent to which evaluations of democratic governance are shared by citizens who voted for the Justice and Development Party (AKP), the winner at the 2007 Turkish elections, and those who voted for the opposition parties, the Republican People's Party (CHP) and the Nationalist Action Party (MHP). It uses survey data about governance evaluations from. the 2007 Turkish Election Study. The evidence rejects the idea that losers withhold consent, creating polarized pluralism. It gives some support to a winner's affect. It finds a substantial degree of similarity in views of governance across party lines. Differences between voters for the two losing parties are sometimes greater than differences with the AKP. Regardless of dissatisfaction with some features of governance, there is an overwhelming consensus rejecting a change of regime to military or Shari'a rule.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 363-378 |
| Number of pages | 16 |
| Journal | Turkish Studies |
| Volume | 9 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Early online date | 21 May 2008 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2008 |
Keywords
- transitions
- democracy
- Turkey
Cite this
Turkish voters and losers' consent. / Rose, Richard.
In: Turkish Studies, Vol. 9, No. 2, 2008, p. 363-378.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Turkish voters and losers' consent
AU - Rose, Richard
PY - 2008
Y1 - 2008
N2 - This paper tests four hypotheses of "losers' consent"-that is, the extent to which evaluations of democratic governance are shared by citizens who voted for the Justice and Development Party (AKP), the winner at the 2007 Turkish elections, and those who voted for the opposition parties, the Republican People's Party (CHP) and the Nationalist Action Party (MHP). It uses survey data about governance evaluations from. the 2007 Turkish Election Study. The evidence rejects the idea that losers withhold consent, creating polarized pluralism. It gives some support to a winner's affect. It finds a substantial degree of similarity in views of governance across party lines. Differences between voters for the two losing parties are sometimes greater than differences with the AKP. Regardless of dissatisfaction with some features of governance, there is an overwhelming consensus rejecting a change of regime to military or Shari'a rule.
AB - This paper tests four hypotheses of "losers' consent"-that is, the extent to which evaluations of democratic governance are shared by citizens who voted for the Justice and Development Party (AKP), the winner at the 2007 Turkish elections, and those who voted for the opposition parties, the Republican People's Party (CHP) and the Nationalist Action Party (MHP). It uses survey data about governance evaluations from. the 2007 Turkish Election Study. The evidence rejects the idea that losers withhold consent, creating polarized pluralism. It gives some support to a winner's affect. It finds a substantial degree of similarity in views of governance across party lines. Differences between voters for the two losing parties are sometimes greater than differences with the AKP. Regardless of dissatisfaction with some features of governance, there is an overwhelming consensus rejecting a change of regime to military or Shari'a rule.
KW - transitions
KW - democracy
KW - Turkey
U2 - 10.1080/14683840802012116
DO - 10.1080/14683840802012116
M3 - Article
VL - 9
SP - 363
EP - 378
JO - Turkish Studies
JF - Turkish Studies
SN - 1468-3849
IS - 2
ER -