Search
Search Results
-
Incumbency advantage of mayors in cities with county rights in Hungary
40-51Views:31There are twenty-three cities with county rights in Hungary. These cities are playing extremely important role because of their location, population and their administrative duties. For these reasons they can fall prey to national parties and political actors even during local elections. The aim of this study is to analyze these settlements in regard to the incumbency of mayors. Incumbency means the holding of an office, and the incumbent politician is the current holder of a political office. My goal is to show – by quantitative comparison – that the so-called incumbent advantage is prevalent in these cities. I also examine whether the candidates of the winning parties at the first order general elections are faring better than their competitors.
-
The 2019 local elections in Szeged
52-66Views:28The 2019 local, municipal election outclasses the second-order elections in the given political constellation. This is especially true in the case of Szeged, where the opposition – unlike the situation at the national level – has the power for a long time. To change this situation, the governing parties, taking advantage of their dominant position – and using all means – conducted a very vigorous campaign, changing the city into a battlefield. According to the results, the governemt’s attempt was not successfull, it was rather contraproductive. The reigning mayor and city management won an unprecedented victory. The root cause of it is a special urban policy which extracted the local politics from the partyfights and overrode party interests, and which represented the interests of the city succesfully and with credibility even against cross-wind. Based on the cooperation of the entire opposition the implemented urban policy is symbolized by and embodied in the person of the mayor in office since 2002.
-
Mobilization incongruence in the Hungarian local electioms
5-24Views:32In local elections, national voting patterns are often not repeated as results show significant incongruence in terms of turnout, party performance and seat shares. Political science explains these various differences with several distinct theoretical frameworks that approach this incongruence from the aspect of voter behavior. The aim of this study is not to provide an alternative for these conventional explanations but to complement them with the detailed analysis of mobilization in an attempt to clear up certain gaps in the models. My main proposition is that parties can mobilize their supporters for the local elections with differing effectiveness producing incongruence in voter turnout and seat shares. In the capital and in the larger cities there is a mobilization gap mainly affecting left-wing voters that causes lower turnout and weaker electoral performance by these parties. This gap can most probably be explained by a combination of social and institutional factors and has a profound effect on election outcomes.