How Substitutable Are the Classical and Radical Right?
Over the last two decades, a new generation of right-wing parties and leaders has emerged worldwide. A central question is how substitutable voters perceive these parties to be relative to the classical right. We address this question using a quasi-natural experiment from Spain’s 2023 general election. Due to a last-minute candidate withdrawal, the radical right (Vox) could not run in one constituency. This unexpected event, unrelated to economic or ideological fundamentals, allows us to estimate the effects of radical right parties on electoral outcomes. Using a synthetic difference-in-differences design, we find that the classical right captured 82.9% of the radical right vote. The radical right’s absence also slightly increased the vote share for left-wing parties and nearly doubled protest voting. These effects are stronger in high-unemployment areas, suggesting that the classical and radical right are less likely to be viewed as substitutes there. Additional analyses using survey data corroborate our findings.
-
-
Copy CitationJesús Fernández-Villaverde and Carlos Sanz, "How Substitutable Are the Classical and Radical Right?," NBER Working Paper 32610 (2024), https://doi.org/10.3386/w32610.Download Citation
-
Published Versions
Fernández-Villaverde, Jesús & Sanz, Carlos, 2025. "How substitutable are the classical and radical right?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 252(C), DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2025.105521. citation courtesy of 
Jesús Fernández-Villaverde & Carlos Sanz, 2025. "How substitutable are the classical and radical right?," Journal of Public Economics, vol 252.
More from the NBER
In addition to working papers, the NBER disseminates affiliates’ latest findings through a range of free periodicals — the NBER Reporter, the NBER Digest, the Bulletin on Health, and the Bulletin on Entrepreneurship — as well as online conference reports, video lectures, and interviews.
