[22nd General Election Research Series] Did Voters' Evaluation of Major Parties' Nominations Affect Vote Choice?

1. Introduction

The voter turnout for this general election was 67%, the highest in 32 years. This can be seen as a result of both the opposition party, which advocated for 'punishing the Yoon Suk-yeol administration,' and the ruling party, which advocated for 'punishing Lee Jae-myung and Cho Kuk,' fiercely competing to bring more supporters to the polls until the very end of the election. The outcome of this intense election was a landslide victory for the Democratic Party, a crushing defeat for the People Power Party, and a strong showing by the Cho Kuk Innovation Party. Out of 254 district seats, the Democratic Party secured an independent majority with 161 seats, the People Power Party took 90 seats, and the New Future Party, the Rebuilding Korea Party, and the Progressive Party each secured one seat. For the 46 proportional representation seats, the People's Future Party secured 18 seats with 36.67%, the Democratic United Party secured 14 seats with 26.69%, the Cho Kuk Innovation Party secured 12 seats with 24.25%, and the Rebuilding Korea Party secured 2 seats with 3.61%. Following these results, analyses on why the ruling party suffered such a devastating defeat have been pouring in daily.

However, if we turn back the clock to the early stages of the election, there was a nomination period during which a landslide victory for the Democratic Party was difficult to anticipate. The factional conflict surrounding the Democratic Party's nominations faced much criticism, summarized by the phrase 'pro-Lee Jae-myung windfall, anti-Lee Jae-myung demise.' During the party caucus, issues of fairness and transparency in the evaluation of lawmakers were raised, such as the need for clear grounds for nomination criteria, and criticism of 'backroom nominations' arose as appeals from incumbent lawmakers who received evaluations in the bottom 20% were rejected. Lawmakers defected in protest of their exclusion from nominations, and the supporter base showed signs of division, leading to growing calls for accountability from party leader Lee Jae-myung and resignation from the nomination review committee chair. Although Lee Jae-myung stated that he was implementing a 'systematic nomination,' the issue of intra-party democracy appeared to be severe.

In contrast, the People Power Party's nomination process appeared to be free of controversy. It was evaluated as a quiet nomination process by either exclusively nominating incumbent lawmakers or holding primary elections without cutting them off. The Democratic Party criticized this, suggesting that if incumbent lawmakers were cut off, they might support the Kim Keon-hee special prosecutor bill, which is scheduled for a vote during the remainder of the 21st National Assembly term. As a public organization, a political party must be sensitive not only to its members but also to general public opinion; however, the People Power Party's nomination process followed its own internal logic to the extent that it was criticized as a 'callous nomination.' Consequently, most incumbent lawmakers survived, and key associates of President Yoon also received nominations. Although it was a quiet nomination process, factional conflicts emerged within the People Power Party, leading to the departure of Lee Jun-seok's faction and the formation of a new party.

Observing the nomination situations of both parties, voters weary of the political fatigue turned their attention to the so-called 'third zone,' formed by lawmakers who defected from the Democratic Party and the People Power Party in protest of their nominations. It seemed that the defectors from the Democratic Party, centered around Lee Nak-yon, and the defectors from the People Power Party, centered around Lee Jun-seok, would join forces to present a new alternative. Unfortunately, this alliance collapsed in a short period. Amidst the confusion, just as hopes for the third zone began to fade, the Cho Kuk Innovation Party emerged as a proportional representation party about a month before the general election. Judging by the election results, the Cho Kuk Innovation Party's strategy of 'voting for the Democratic Party in districts and Cho Kuk Innovation Party for proportional representation' appears to have been effective.

This article focuses on voters' evaluations of each party's nominations as one of the important factors influencing the results of this election. What were the voters' evaluations of the Democratic Party's nominations, which were fraught with controversy, and the People Power Party's nominations, which were described as quiet? Did voters' evaluations of nominations affect their choices of candidates and parties? This article seeks answers to these questions through an online survey conducted by Korea Research at the request of the East Asia Institute (EAI) immediately after the 22nd general election (conducted April 11-15, 2024, N=1530).

2. Evaluation of Both Parties' Nominations

First, we examined how voters evaluated the nomination process for candidates of the Democratic Party and the People Power Party. As shown in <Figure 1>, we can compare the evaluations of the nominations of both parties by all respondents. Overall, negative evaluations of both parties' nominations outnumbered positive evaluations. For the Democratic Party's nominations, 33.9% responded 'well done,' and 50.5% responded 'poorly done,' with a negative evaluation being 16.6 percentage points greater than a positive evaluation. In contrast, for the People Power Party's nominations, 22% responded 'well done,' and 60.8% responded 'poorly done,' with a difference of 38.8 percentage points. This indicates that, unlike the significant controversy and criticism surrounding the Democratic Party's nominations, the evaluation of the People Power Party's nominations was considerably more negative.

<Figure 1> Evaluation of Democratic Party and People Power Party Nominations (%)

Since voters' evaluations of each party's nominations may vary depending on party preference or support tendency, <Figure 2> compares the proportion of respondents who answered 'well done' for the nominations of the Democratic Party and the People Power Party by supporters of each party. As can be easily predicted, the proportion of Democratic Party supporters who rated the Democratic Party's nominations as 'well done' was highest at 65%. This was followed by supporters of the Cho Kuk Innovation Party (48%), supporters of other parties (32%), and supporters of the Green Justice Party (29%), and supporters of the Rebuilding Korea Party (22%). Notably, the positive evaluation rate among supporters of the New Future Party, formed by those who defected from the Democratic Party in protest of its nominations, was very low at 12%, similar to that of People Power Party supporters or unaffiliated respondents (13%).

Similarly, the proportion of respondents who rated the People Power Party's nominations as 'well done' was highest among People Power Party supporters at 46%. However, this is 19 percentage points lower than the proportion of Democratic Party supporters who positively evaluated the Democratic Party's nominations. Furthermore, even among People Power Party supporters, less than half responded positively to the People Power Party's nominations. Additionally, the proportion of respondents who answered that the People Power Party's nominations were 'well done' was extremely low among supporters of parties other than the People Power Party. Among supporters of the Democratic Party, Green Justice Party, and other parties, 12% gave a positive evaluation. Among supporters of the Rebuilding Korea Party, a party formed by defectors from the People Power Party, it was 10%, among unaffiliated respondents it was 9%, and among supporters of the Cho Kuk Innovation Party and the New Future Party, it was around 4%.

<Figure 2> Proportion who rated Democratic Party and People Power Party Nominations as Well Done (%): By Party Supporter

<Table 1> Evaluation of Democratic Party and People Power Party Nominations (Average Score): By Party Supporter

We examined the differences in evaluations of the nomination process for candidates of the Democratic Party and the People Power Party among supporters of each party in <Figure 2>. We then confirmed whether these differences are statistically significant through average analysis. The evaluation of the Democratic Party's and the People Power Party's nominations was measured on a 4-point scale: '1=Very Well Done, 2=Somewhat Well Done, 3=Somewhat Poorly Done, 4=Very Poorly Done.' <Table 1> summarizes these evaluation results by average scores for each party supporter.

First, regarding the evaluation of the Democratic Party's nominations, Democratic Party supporters viewed them favorably with an average score of 2.14, indicating they were 'somewhat well done.' Supporters of the Cho Kuk Innovation Party, Green Justice Party, and other parties also evaluated them favorably with average scores below 3.0. Supporters of the New Future Party, formed by defectors from the Democratic Party, gave a more negative evaluation of the Democratic Party's nominations than People Power Party supporters. These evaluations of the Democratic Party's nominations by party supporters showed statistically significant differences, as indicated by the F-value. Furthermore, although supporters of the Democratic Party and the Cho Kuk Innovation Party both evaluated the nominations favorably, the difference between these two groups was also statistically significant (t=-4.421, p=.000).

Next, regarding the evaluation of the People Power Party's nominations, People Power Party supporters gave an average score of 2.52, indicating they were 'somewhat well done.' However, all other party supporter groups evaluated them as 'somewhat poorly done' with scores above 3.0. We can also see a difference between People Power Party supporters and Democratic Party supporters: the satisfaction with the People Power Party's nominations as evaluated by its supporters is lower than the satisfaction with the Democratic Party's nominations as evaluated by its supporters (2.14). This is consistent with the previous observation in <Figure 2> that the proportion of positive evaluations of the People Power Party's nominations was lower than that of the Democratic Party's nominations among all party supporter groups except for People Power Party supporters, and even among People Power Party supporters, it was less than half. This helps explain why, overall, the negative evaluation rate of the People Power Party's nominations was higher than that of the Democratic Party's nominations, as shown in <Figure 1>.

Furthermore, respondents who did not support any particular party, as well as supporters of the New Future Party and the Rebuilding Korea Party, evaluated both the Democratic Party's and the People Power Party's nominations negatively. It is particularly noteworthy that, on average, New Future Party supporters evaluated the Democratic Party's nominations more negatively (3.26) than the People Power Party's nominations (3.23), and Rebuilding Korea Party supporters also evaluated the People Power Party's nominations more negatively (3.14 vs. 3.29).

The analysis above shows that voters' evaluations of the Democratic Party's and the People Power Party's nominations differ. Although the Democratic Party's nominations were widely publicized and controversial, they received better evaluations than the People Power Party's nominations, which were quiet. The reason voters evaluated them this way might be that they believed the safe nomination strategy resulted in a situation where only pro-Yoon and 영남권 (Yeongnam region) figures survived, leading to no change. The Democratic Party's nominations, despite significant internal struggles, seemed to have an intention to change the party in a new direction, and the remaining forces after the opposition's defection might have been able to achieve greater cohesion and contest the election with a unified front, thus receiving more positive evaluations.

However, it is important to note that even if the Democratic Party's nomination process is evaluated slightly more positively, a certain proportion of supporters, similar to the People Power Party, also hold negative views. Naturally, supporters of different parties tend to view their party's nomination process more favorably; however, it is evident that they did not blindly evaluate their party's nomination process positively.

3. Relationship Between Evaluation of Both Parties' Nominations and Vote Choice

Did voters' evaluations of the Democratic Party's and the People Power Party's nominations actually influence their choices for district candidates and proportional representation in the election? Did those within the Democratic Party's supporter base who negatively evaluated the Democratic Party's nominations make different voting choices than those who positively evaluated them? Similarly, did those within the People Power Party's supporter base who negatively evaluated the People Power Party's nominations make different voting choices than those who positively evaluated them? This section seeks answers to these questions through analysis of survey data. We also examined through average analysis whether there are statistically significant differences in the evaluation of both parties' nominations among voter groups who made different combinations of choices for district and proportional representation votes.

First, let's look at the relationship between nomination evaluation and vote choice among Democratic Party supporters. As shown in <Table 2>, among those who evaluated the nominations favorably, over half (56.1%) chose the Democratic Party for district candidates and the Democratic United Party for proportional representation. Among those who evaluated the nominations unfavorably, 37.7% chose the Democratic Party and the Democratic United Party combination, which was the largest proportion, but the difference was very small compared to the 34% who chose the Democratic Party and the Cho Kuk Innovation Party combination. Among respondents who gave negative evaluations, 11.3% chose the Democratic Party and other minor parties, and 9.4% chose the People Power Party and other minor parties.

Furthermore, focusing on those within the Democratic Party's supporter base who chose the Democratic Party and the Democratic United Party combination, the difference between the proportion who positively evaluated nominations (56.1%) and negatively evaluated them (37.7%) is a significant 18.4 percentage points. This means that among those who believed the nominations were poorly done, the proportion who chose the Democratic Party and the Democratic United Party combination was much lower than among those who believed the nominations were well done. Thus, we can see a difference in vote choice between the groups that evaluated the Democratic Party's nominations favorably and unfavorably.

<Table 2> Evaluation of Democratic Party Nominations and Vote Choice (%): For Democratic Party Supporters

Next, we examined whether the vote choices of Cho Kuk Innovation Party supporters differed based on their evaluation of the Democratic Party's nominations. Although there were differences compared to Democratic Party supporters, Cho Kuk Innovation Party supporters were the group among non-Democratic Party supporters who evaluated the Democratic Party's nominations most positively. As shown in <Table 3>, Cho Kuk Innovation Party supporters mostly voted for the Democratic Party and the Cho Kuk Innovation Party combination, regardless of their evaluation of the Democratic Party's nominations. However, the proportion who believed the Democratic Party's nominations were poorly done (60%) was lower than the proportion who believed they were well done (73.6%). Instead, among those who chose minor party candidates for district seats and minor parties including the Cho Kuk Innovation Party for proportional representation, the proportion who negatively evaluated the Democratic Party's nominations (32.5%) was higher than the proportion who positively evaluated them (22.6%). This indicates that among Cho Kuk Innovation Party supporters, there were more individuals who did not choose the Democratic Party for district seats among those who believed the nominations were poorly done compared to those who believed they were well done. This implies that differences in vote choice based on the evaluation of the Democratic Party's nominations were also observed among Cho Kuk Innovation Party supporters.

<Table 3> Evaluation of Democratic Party Nominations and Vote Choice (%): For Cho Kuk Innovation Party Supporters

<Table 4> shows the relationship between the evaluation of the People Power Party's nominations and vote choice among People Power Party supporters. First, it is noticeable that the proportion of People Power Party supporters who voted for the People Power Party and the People's Future Party combination is much higher compared to the proportion of Democratic Party supporters who voted for the Democratic Party and the Democratic United Party combination. Among those who positively evaluated the People Power Party's nominations, 87.3% voted for the People Power Party and the People's Future Party. Among those who negatively evaluated them, 73.7% voted for the People Power Party and the People's Future Party. Nevertheless, the difference between these two groups is not small, at 13.6%. Among those who believed the nominations were poorly done, the proportion who chose combinations such as the People Power Party and other minor parties, or the People Power Party and the Rebuilding Korea Party, as well as only minor parties for both district and proportional representation, was higher. Thus, we can see that even among People Power Party supporters' evaluations of nominations, there is a small but existing difference in vote choice between the groups that evaluated them favorably and unfavorably.

<Table 4> Evaluation of People Power Party Nominations and Vote Choice (%): For People Power Party Supporters

<Table 5> compares the evaluations of the Democratic Party's and the People Power Party's nominations by respondents based on their chosen combinations of district and proportional representation votes, using average scores. The differences between groups with different vote choices in their evaluations of both parties' nominations are statistically significant. First, regarding the evaluation of the Democratic Party's nominations, supporters who chose the Democratic Party and the Democratic United Party combination had an average score of 2.10, indicating a positive evaluation. Supporters of the Democratic Party and the Cho Kuk Innovation Party, and other parties also evaluated them positively, but there are differences between groups. Notably, the difference between the groups that chose the Democratic Party and the Democratic United Party combination and the Democratic Party and the Cho Kuk Innovation Party combination was also statistically significant (t=-2.146, p=.032). Regardless of which party they chose for proportional representation, those who chose the Democratic Party for district seats and those who chose only minor parties for both district and proportional representation evaluated the Democratic Party's nominations positively.

<Table 5> Evaluation of Democratic Party and People Power Party Nominations (Average Score): By Candidate and Party Choice

Next, regarding the evaluation of the People Power Party's nominations, the pattern is somewhat different. Supporters who chose the People Power Party and the People's Future Party showed the most positive evaluation of the nominations, similar to supporters who chose the Democratic Party and the Democratic United Party. Evaluations of nominations were also positive among those who chose combinations of the People Power Party and other minor parties or the Rebuilding Korea Party. However, unlike the Democratic Party, which received positive evaluations from most voter groups except for those who chose the People Power Party for district seats, the People Power Party received positive evaluations only from the group that chose the People Power Party for district seats. In other words, among those who chose other parties for both district and proportional representation, the evaluation of the People Power Party's nominations (3.27) was more negative than the evaluation of the Democratic Party's nominations (2.98).

4. Analysis of the Impact of Voters' Evaluation of Party Nominations on Vote Choice

The preliminary analysis revealed a tendency for evaluations of each party's nominations to differ according to party support. We also found that a certain proportion of party supporters evaluate their party's nominations negatively, and that these voter evaluations of party nominations are somewhat related to vote choice. This section more closely examines the impact of voters' evaluations of the Democratic Party's and the People Power Party's nominations on their choices for district candidates and proportional representation in the actual election through regression analysis.

<Table 6> summarizes the regression analysis results on the impact of evaluations of the Democratic Party's and the People Power Party's nominations on district candidate choice. First, the nomination evaluation variables for the Democratic Party and the People Power Party were set as the core explanatory variables, coded as 0 for 'well done' and 1 for 'poorly done.' The dependent variable was district candidate choice, coded as 1 for 'Democratic Party candidate,' 2 for 'other party candidate,' and 3 for 'People Power Party candidate.' In addition, socioeconomic variables such as gender, age, income, and education level, as well as political variables such as political interest, party support tendency, and subjective ideological tendency, were set as control variables influencing the dependent variable.

First, according to the regression analysis results for all respondents, the nomination evaluation variables for the Democratic Party and the People Power Party had statistically significant effects, controlling for the influence of other variables. Respondents who believed the Democratic Party's nominations were poorly done were less likely to choose a Democratic Party candidate in the district election compared to those who believed they were well done. Similarly, respondents who believed the People Power Party's nominations were poorly done were less likely to choose a People Power Party candidate compared to those who believed they were well done. In addition, regarding the influence of control variables, lower political interest, conservative ideology, and support for the People Power Party were associated with choosing a People Power Party candidate.

Next, we divided the analysis to compare the influence of party nomination evaluations on district candidate choice between Democratic Party supporters and People Power Party supporters. As shown in the table, among Democratic Party supporters, the Democratic Party nomination variable was statistically significant, while the People Power Party nomination evaluation variable had no influence. This indicates that for Democratic Party supporters, the People Power Party's nomination evaluation was not an important variable for district candidate choice, whereas the evaluation of their own party's nominations was important. Respondents who believed the Democratic Party's nominations were poorly done were more likely to choose a candidate other than the Democratic Party in the district. Among control variables, younger age and higher political interest were also associated with choosing a Democratic Party candidate.

Among People Power Party supporters, neither the evaluation of the People Power Party's nominations nor the Democratic Party's nominations had a significant impact on district candidate choice. This result could have been anticipated from the frequency analysis, as People Power Party supporters overwhelmingly chose People Power Party candidates regardless of their evaluation of the nominations. Even though the proportion of negative evaluations of nominations was higher among People Power Party supporters, it did not translate into vote choice. It can be inferred that perhaps People Power Party supporters are more loyal voters who vote even if they are dissatisfied, or that they had no other viable options to defect to. Considering the unusually low voter turnout in the Yeongnam region in this general election, the latter is likely the case.

<Table 6> Linear Regression Analysis: Impact of Nomination Evaluation on District Candidate Choice (Overall, By Party Supporter)

<Table 7> provides insights into the impact of evaluations of the Democratic Party's and the People Power Party's nominations on proportional representation party choice. The core explanatory variables and control variables used here are the same as in the regression analysis for district candidate choice. The dependent variable is proportional representation party choice, coded as 1. Democratic United Party, 2. Cho Kuk Innovation Party, 3. Other Parties, 4. Rebuilding Korea Party, 5. People's Future Party, etc.

According to the regression analysis results, when considering all respondents, the nomination evaluation variables for the Democratic Party and the People Power Party both had statistically significant effects, controlling for the influence of other variables. This is similar to the results for district candidate choice: respondents who believed the Democratic Party's nominations were poorly done were less likely to choose the Democratic United Party in the proportional representation vote compared to those who believed they were well done. Similarly, respondents who believed the People Power Party's nominations were poorly done were less likely to choose the People's Future Party compared to those who believed they were well done. In addition, regarding the influence of control variables, being male, older, having lower political interest, being conservative, and supporting the People Power Party were associated with choosing a conservative party.

Next, we conducted a comparative analysis by dividing the respondents into Democratic Party supporters and People Power Party supporters. In both groups, nomination evaluations had statistically significant effects. Among Democratic Party supporters, those with negative views on the Democratic Party's nominations were more likely to vote for parties other than the Democratic United Party. Conversely, those with negative views on the People Power Party's nominations were more likely to vote for progressive parties. Control variables indicate that younger age and higher political interest were associated with choosing a Democratic Party candidate. This phenomenon was similarly observed among People Power Party supporters, where those with negative views on the Democratic Party's nominations and positive views on the People Power Party's nominations were more likely to vote for conservative parties. Among People Power Party supporters, those who believed the People Power Party's nominations were poorly done were more likely to vote for parties other than the People's Future Party. This demonstrates that supporters' evaluations of nominations are an important variable influencing proportional representation party choice.

<Table 7> Linear Regression Analysis: Impact of Nomination Evaluation on Proportional Representation Party Choice (Overall, By Party Supporter)

<Table 8> summarizes the regression analysis results on the impact of evaluations of the Democratic Party's and the People Power Party's nominations on the combination of district candidate and proportional representation party choices. The independent variables and control variables are the same as those used above. The dependent variable was coded as 1. Democratic Party/Democratic United Party, 2. Democratic Party/Cho Kuk Innovation Party, 3. Other/Other, 4. People Power Party/Rebuilding Korea Party, 5. People Power Party/People's Future Party, etc.

First, according to the regression analysis results for all respondents, the nomination evaluation variables for the Democratic Party and the People Power Party both had statistically significant effects, controlling for the influence of other variables. Respondents who believed the Democratic Party's nominations were poorly done were less likely to choose the combination of a Democratic Party candidate for district and a Democratic Party-affiliated party for proportional representation compared to those who believed they were well done. Similarly, respondents who believed the People Power Party's nominations were poorly done were less likely to choose the combination of a People Power Party candidate for district and a conservative party for proportional representation compared to those who believed they were well done. In addition, regarding the influence of control variables, older age, lower political interest, conservative ideology, and a tendency to support conservative parties were associated with choosing a conservative party combination for both district and proportional representation.

In contrast, the People Power Party's nominations seemed to proceed without significant issues. It was evaluated as a 'quiet nomination' process, as incumbent lawmakers were either given single nominations or underwent primaries without being cut off. The Democratic Party criticized this, suggesting that if incumbent lawmakers were cut off, they might be concerned about their support for the Kim Keon-hee Special Prosecutor Act, which was to be put to a vote during the remainder of the 21st National Assembly. A political party, as a public organization, must be sensitive not only to its members but also to general public opinion. The People Power Party's nominations followed their own internal logic to such an extent that they were criticized as 'indifferent nominations.' As a result, most incumbent lawmakers survived, and key aides to President Yoon also received nominations. Despite being a quiet nomination process, factional conflicts also emerged within the People Power Party, leading to the defection of figures associated with Lee Jun-seok and the formation of a new party.

<Table 8> Linear Regression Analysis: Impact of Nomination Evaluation on District + Proportional Representation Choice (Overall, By Party Supporter)

Note 1) Dependent Variable: District + Proportional Representation Choice (1. Dem/Dem, 2. Dem/Cho Kuk, 3. Other/Other, 4. PPP/Rebuilding, 5. PPP/People's Future)

Note 2) Independent Variables: DP Nomination Poorly Done (0. Well Done, 1. Poorly Done), PPP Nomination Poorly Done (0. Well Done, 1. Poorly Done)

Note 3) Control Variables: Gender (1. Male, 2. Female), Age (1. 18-29 yrs ~ 7. 70s),

Income (1. Under 1 million KRW ~ 11. Over 10 million KRW), Education (1. No formal education ~ 8. PhD program),

Political Interest (1. Very Interested ~ 5. Not Interested at All), Ideological Tendency (0. Very Progressive ~ 10. Very Conservative),

Party Support Tendency (1. Democratic Party, 2. Cho Kuk Innovation Party, 3. Other Party, 4. Unaffiliated, 5. People Power Party)

Note 4) ***p<.001, **p<.01, *p<.05

Finally, this section seeks to answer whether voters who negatively evaluated both parties' nominations chose minor parties, by analyzing survey data. <Table 9> summarizes the results of a binary logistic regression analysis on the impact of evaluations of both the Democratic Party's and the People Power Party's nominations on the choice of minor parties. The core explanatory variables were set as evaluations of both the Democratic Party's and the People Power Party's nominations, coded as 1. Both parties nominated well, 2. Only one party nominated well, 3. Both nominated poorly. The dependent variables were district candidate choice, proportional representation party choice, and the combination of district and proportional representation party choices, all coded as 0 for established parties and 1 for other minor parties. The Cho Kuk Innovation Party was grouped with established parties because, as observed in previous analyses, those who chose the Cho Kuk Innovation Party showed similar tendencies to Democratic Party supporters in their nomination evaluations and exhibited distinct characteristics compared to other minor parties. In addition, control variables influencing the dependent variables, such as gender, age, income, education level, and political interest, were coded identically to the previous analyses. However, party support tendency and subjective ideological tendency were re-coded as moderate ideological tendency and minor party support tendency to reflect their influence on the choice of third-party candidates.

We examined whether respondents who believed both the Democratic Party and the People Power Party nominated poorly were more likely to vote for minor parties in district, proportional representation, and combined district and proportional representation votes. The nomination evaluation variables for both the Democratic Party and the People Power Party had statistically significant effects, controlling for the influence of other variables. Respondents who believed both parties nominated poorly were more likely to vote for minor party candidates in the district election compared to those who believed they nominated well. Similarly, respondents who held negative views on both parties' nominations were more likely to choose minor parties in the proportional representation vote compared to those who held positive views. In light of these results, it is natural that voters with negative evaluations of both parties' nominations were more likely to vote for minor party combinations.

<Table 9> Binary Logistic Regression Analysis: Impact of Nomination Evaluation on Minor Party Choice

Note 1) Dependent Variable: District Vote (0. Dem, PPP, 1. Other), Proportional Vote (0. Dem, Cho Kuk, PPP, 1. Other),

District + proportional representation vote (0. Democratic/Democratic, Democratic/Cho Kuk, People Power/People Power, 1. Other)

Note 2) Independent variables: Two-party nomination evaluation (1. Both did well, 2. Only one did well, 3. Both did poorly)

Note 3) Control variables: Gender (1. Male, 2. Female), Age (1. 18-29 years old ~ 7. 70s),

Income (1. Below 1 million KRW ~ 11. Above 10 million KRW), Education level (1. No formal education ~ 8. Doctoral program postgraduate),

Political interest (1. Very interested ~ 5. Not interested at all), Centrist ideological orientation (0. Other, 1. Centrist),

Tendency to support minor parties (1. Democratic Party + People Power Party, 2. Unaffiliated, 3. Other parties)

Note 4) ***p<.001, **p<.01, *p<.05

The results above indicate that for the Democratic Party's support base, the evaluation of the Democratic Party's nominations significantly influenced voting choices for district candidates, proportional representation parties, and the combination of both. In contrast, for the People Power Party's support base, nomination evaluations did not affect district candidate votes, but did influence proportional representation votes and the combined district and proportional representation choices. This can be interpreted as the People Power Party's supporters expressing dissatisfaction with nominations through proportional representation votes, for which there were more alternatives compared to district races. Furthermore, in a first-past-the-post system for district races, voters may tend to vote for the majority party even if dissatisfied, due to concerns about their vote becoming a wasted vote. However, with proportional representation votes, this risk is lower, potentially allowing for more candid voting. Additionally, those who held negative views on the nominations of both major parties were more likely to vote for minor parties.

5. Conclusion

As examined above, voters' evaluations of the nominations by the Democratic Party and the People Power Party had a statistically significant impact on their voting choices. In a similar vein, when asked in a survey whether the Democratic Party's nomination controversies affected their voting decisions, 25.3% of respondents said it had no impact, while 43.3% said it did. Regarding the Yoon-Han conflict that emerged during the election campaign, the proportion of respondents who stated it had an impact on their voting decisions was 41.2%, higher than the 26.6% who said it did not.

Although this general election has concluded, elections will continue, and parties must compete to gain power. Both the ruling and opposition parties must properly understand and interpret the public sentiment revealed in this election to secure their future. As always, those who suffered a crushing defeat are engaged in a blame game. President Yoon mentioned the need for Han Dong-hoon, the interim leader, to resign in January, accusing him of monopolizing the party, which was when the Yoon-Han conflict theory first emerged. Subsequently, a second conflict theory arose regarding the proportional representation candidate selection process, and a third conflict theory has emerged immediately after the general election. Regardless of who bears more responsibility, it is clear that the government and the ruling party failed to grasp public sentiment accurately.

The most significant reason for the ruling party's unprecedented defeat in the general election is likely the large number of voters who agreed with the narrative of judging the incumbent government. The general election, which served as a mid-term evaluation of the Yoon administration, may have amplified the 'judge the government' sentiment, and the economic environment of high inflation might have also worked against the ruling party. While both parties had issues during the election campaign, for voters, the need to hold the president and the ruling party accountable for their inadequate response to issues such as the doctor-parliament conflict, the Yoon-Han conflict, and the First Lady's controversies felt more urgent than the need to check the opposition party.

Beyond these factors, it is important to remember that voter disappointment with the People Power Party's nominations also played a significant role. While the overall evaluation of the People Power Party's nominations by respondents was more negative than that of the Democratic Party's nominations, and negative responses were high even among the People Power Party's supporters, the fact that the combination of the People Power Party and the Future Party secured the highest proportion of votes is noteworthy. This indicates that despite greater dissatisfaction with nominations compared to the Democratic Party's supporters, there were fewer defections among the People Power Party's supporters in their voting choices. Furthermore, similar to the Democratic Party's supporters, individuals with negative evaluations of nomination assessments tended to choose combinations with other minor parties, but the fact that this proportion was not large is also significant.

If parties make poor nomination decisions, and their supporters are aware of this but cannot effectively control it through their voting choices, then parties may continue to make nominations without considering their supporters' evaluations in the future. This is because it sends a message to the parties that even if nominations displease the supporters, they will continue to choose that party. However, the crucial point is that while such nominations might continue to receive support from the base, they are unlikely to gain the support of voters outside of the party's base.

The Democratic Party, which won the election, should not interpret the results of this general election solely as a sign of public trust in Lee Jae-myung's leadership. As seen in this analysis, while supporters who had positive views on nominations chose the Democratic Party and the Democratic Alliance, many who had negative views opted for other parties for proportional representation. This finding is significant when compared to the People Power Party's supporters. The fact that there were more defections among the Democratic Party's supporters, who had negative views on nominations despite an overall positive evaluation, compared to the People Power Party's supporters, highlights the distinct characteristics of the Democratic Party and People Power Party supporters. It is possible that a larger proportion of Democratic Party supporters are more sensitive to and inclined to engage with internal party politics.

Parties are, by nature, voluntary associations of individuals with shared political ideals and claims, thus possessing factional characteristics. However, if a party becomes an organization that exclusively represents the interests of a select few, it will be impossible to win power through elections, and its political life will be short. As public organizations, parties must play a role in representing the demands and interests of a wider range of groups beyond their supporters and establishing public policies by ensuring participation. To fulfill these roles effectively, the establishment of intra-party democracy is essential.

In this election, the nomination screening processes for both the Democratic Party and the People Power Party were conducted in a manner that granted absolute authority to the central party and the nomination screening committee. Such top-down nomination methods can lead to issues of democratic representation and responsiveness. Therefore, to prevent the nomination process from becoming a source of political contention and to ensure procedural legitimacy, the criteria and methods for nomination screening must be publicly disclosed and codified in advance. While Representative Lee Jae-myung and President Yoon, or the respective party leaderships, are members and leaders of their parties and can express their opinions, exerting influence to ensure that their favored candidates receive nominations undermines intra-party democracy. Whether such actions actually occurred in this election is unknown, but this analysis confirms that even the mere suspicion of such practices can negatively impact voters' evaluations and choices of political parties. ■

■ Author: Seo Hyun-jin, Professor, Department of Social Education, Sookmyung Women's University.

■ Editor: Kim Sun-hee, EAI Research Fellow.

Inquiries: 02-2277-1683 (ext. 209), shkim@eai.or.kr