Billed as \u201cthe year of democracy,\u201d 2024 may ultimately be remembered as the year voters sent incumbents packing. <\/p>\n
The largest-ever single year of elections was also the worst-ever year for those in office. Every governing party facing election in a developed country this year lost vote share \u2013 the first time this has happened since records began \u2013 according to an analysis by the Financial Times. <\/p>\n
Incumbency advantage used to be an iron law of politics. Recently, \u201cbetter the devil you know\u201d has given way to \u201cthrow the rascals out.\u201d Voters\u2019 instincts have been to twist, not stick. In the United States, Kamala Harris appeared to pay a price for her unwillingness to distance herself from incumbent President Joe Biden\u2019s policies, to Donald Trump\u2019s gain. <\/p>\n
What might 2025 bring for incumbents and what factors are at play? <\/p>\n
For decades in wealthy democracies, the surest way to win office was already to hold it. Incumbents were a protected class. Power would switch hands between a small number of mainstream parties, mostly after long periods of relative stability. <\/p>\n
In emerging, poorer democracies, things were more volatile. Mainstream parties were weaker, facing constant challenges from upstart insurgents, so power changed hands more often. <\/p>\n
But this distinction between richer and poorer democracies has blurred. Wealthy democracies have become more volatile, said Ben Ansell, a professor of comparative democratic institutions at the University of Oxford. <\/p>\n
Why was 2024 so difficult for incumbents? Post-mortems have found a common cause of death: inflation. <\/p>\n
Prices jumped in many countries after the Covid-19 pandemic and Russia\u2019s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Driven by a range of factors, including supply disruptions and a rebound in demand, global inflation reached its highest level since the 1990s in 2022. <\/strong>Voters hated it. Even if most of the causes were global, the governments that presided over soaring costs ultimately paid the price. <\/p>\n Perhaps governments had forgotten just how much voters detest inflation. During and after the last big global shock, the 2008 financial crisis, inflation remained relatively low, despite years of huge government stimulus. <\/p>\n Although unemployment soared in the United States and Europe after 2008, inflation was largely stable. The economic pain was more intense for some but was less diffuse. \u201cInflation hurts everybody less than unemployment, but it\u2019s so widespread,\u201d said Ansell. As the economist Isabella Weber recalled in the New York Times: \u201cUnemployment weakens governments. Inflation kills them.\u201d <\/p>\n Perhaps lessons can be learned from Mexico, which elected Claudia Sheinbaum from the governing Morena party, a rare bright spot for incumbents in Latin America amid a long run of defeats. To stem inflation, her party introduced price controls to cap the price of basic groceries in 2022 and renewed the measure last month. <\/p>\n Although mainstream economists are uneasy about price controls, Weber, economics professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, points out Western countries have already implemented a global price cap on Russian oil. In the face of overlapping crises, perhaps this taboo will crumble. <\/p>\n If inflation really was the culprit, this may be good news for tomorrow\u2019s incumbents. Once prices stabilize, wages catch up and voters get used to the new cost of eggs, those in office \u2013 barring more price shocks \u2013 ought to have an easier time in the years to come. At least, that\u2019s the theory. <\/p>\n But it\u2019s not the only theory. The defeat or retreat of incumbents across the globe cannot be explained by materialist factors alone. Cultural, structural forces are also at play, which may be making volatility the rule, not the exception. <\/p>\n Shopping around<\/h2>\n