This article addresses the puzzle of electoral support for corrupt politicians in emerging democracies by examining citizens’ varying attitudes toward political corruption. We make an important theoretical distinction between perceptions of and tolerance for corruption, and argue that these different attitudes vary across individuals depending on whether they are political insiders or outsiders. We test our theory using Afrobarometer survey data from 18 sub‐Saharan African countries and find that individuals included within clientelistic networks simultaneously perceive corruption as ubiquitous and are more tolerant of malfeasance. Meanwhile, those individuals with partisan or ethnic ties to the incumbent are less likely to consider corruption as widespread. Finally, we explore whether variation in attitudes toward corruption influences citizens’ voting behavior, and find that insiders are less likely to “vote the rascals out.”

No abstract

No abstract

On the African continent, where elections are often surrounded by accusations of fraud and manipulation, legal avenues for challenging elections may enhance election integrity and trust in political institutions. Court rulings on electoral petitions have consequences for the distribution of power, but how do they shape public opinion? We theorize and study the way in which court rulings in relation to parliamentary election petitions shape public perceptions of election and judicial legitimacy. Using survey data from the 2016 Zambian election, our results suggest that opposition voters rate quality of elections lower when courts nullify elections. However, judicial legitimacy seems unaffected even for voters in constituencies where the courts have shown independence vis à vis the executive and nullified parliamentary elections won by the governing party.

Why do voters’ evaluations of elections in unconsolidated democracies appear to be unaffected by election-day events? Among the handful of studies that examine the consequences of election experiences in countries with less experience with multiparty elections, a majority finds that what happens on election day does not matter. I seek to reexamine this puzzle using original post-election survey data on the 2015 Nigerian presidential elections. First, I distinguish between voters’ evaluations of the process (1) at their own polling stations ( local) and (2) across the entire country ( national). Second, I highlight three types of election-day experiences that are relevant for unconsolidated democracies: experience with manipulation, administrative irregularities, and election observers. Multivariate regression results indicate that all three experiences are associated with local and national perceptions of electoral integrity. However, the salience of some experiences, such as interactions with election observers, depends on whether voters make local or national election integrity evaluations.