Polarization, abstention, and the median voter theorem

The median voter theorem has long been the default model of voter behavior and candidate choice. While contemporary work on the distribution of political opinion has emphasized polarization and an increasing gap between the left and the right in democracies, the median voter theorem presents a model of anti-polarization: competing candidates move to the center of the ideological distribution to maximize vote share, regardless of the underlying ideological distribution of voters. These anti-polar results, however, largely depend on the singled-peakedness of voter preferences, an assumption that is rapidly losing relevance in the age of polarization. This article presents a model of voter choice that examines three potential mechanisms that can undermine this finding: a relative cost of voting that deters voters who are sufficiently indifferent to both candidates, ideologically motivated third-party alternatives that attract extreme voters, and a bimodal distribution of voter ideology. Under reasonable sets of conditions and empirically observed voter opinion distributions, these mechanisms can be sufficient to cause strategically minded candidates to fail to converge to the center, or to even become more polarized than their electorate.

Automated summary

The median voter theorem suggests that competing candidates tend to move towards the center of the ideological distribution to maximize vote share, regardless of voter preferences. However, in the age of polarization, where voters are more inclined towards extreme positions, this theorem may no longer hold true.