Abstract
The 2014 European Parliament (EP) elections were characterised by a novel element in European Union (EU) politics. For the first time, the major European party families put forward top candidates for President of the European Commission, the so-called <em>Spitzenkandidaten</em>. This paper tests whether this innovation had the potential to—at least partially—alleviate the alleged accountability deficit. We rely on original survey data to assess citizens’ preferences for each of the main <em>Spitzenkandidaten</em>: Jean-Claude Juncker, Martin Schulz, and Guy Verhofstadt. Our research is guided by three questions: what explains whether citizens formulate a preference for a certain <em>Spitzenkandidat</em>? Which factors are responsible for variations in such preferences? And, are these explanations moderated by citizens’ political awareness? We show that three factors enable citizens to formulate a preference for the <em>Spitzenkandidaten</em>: news exposure, general EU political information, and campaign-specific information about the <em>Spitzenkandidaten</em>. Furthermore, we demonstrate that only the most knowledgeable citizens are able to use party cues in their evaluations of the <em>Spitzenkandidaten</em>. The implications of our findings are discussed with reference to the EU’s democratic deficit debate.
Highlights
The 2014 European Parliament (EP) elections brought about a novelty: the major European party families nominated top candidates for President of the European Commission, the so-called Spitzenkandidaten
We explore fundamental questions relating to this novelty: first, what explains whether citizens formulate a preference for a Spitzenkandidat? Second, which factors are responsible for variations in such preferences? And third, are these explanations moderated by citizens’ political awareness?
Our research is guided by three questions: first, what explains whether citizens formulate a preference for a certain Spitzenkandidat? Second, which factors are responsible for variations in such preferences? And, third, to what extent are the effects of these different factors moderated by political awareness, which Zaller (1992, p. 21) defines as ‘the extent to which an individual pays attention to politics and understands what he or she has encountered’
Summary
The 2014 European Parliament (EP) elections brought about a novelty: the major European party families nominated top candidates for President of the European Commission, the so-called Spitzenkandidaten. The European Council nominated candidates for Commission President. Politics and Governance, 2016, Volume 4, Issue 1, Pages 37-54 power was—indirectly—at stake. We situate our study in extant research on EP elections. This literature traditionally characterises these elections as being second-order national elections, which tend to be dominated by domestic politics. They display more signs of sincere voting and provide more opportunity to express discontent because no executive power has been at stake far. Turnout is generally lower than in national elections, smaller and opposition parties tend to gain votes at the expense of government and larger parties, and radical, often Eurosceptic parties at the left and right ends of the spectrum do relatively well (e.g., Hix & Marsh, 2011; Reif & Schmitt, 1980; Van der Eijk, Franklin, & Marsh, 1996).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
