| OCR Text |
Show 156 in all election years and available variables to my dataset for this project, I did not have the resources (time and money) and language expertise to code and fill in all the missing platforms for niche and mainstream parties. I think having this information would bolster the results, knowing that the full lifespan of the niche party factored into the results. A more accessible next step, instead of filling in the missing observations, would be to test these results on niche party strategies on additional types of niche parties. Essentially, to add to the existing dataset by including the Euroskeptic niche parties and internet niche parties (i.e., pirate parties). These two types would be interesting additions since they are relatively new niche parties, emerging in the 1990s and 2000s, and are seen across Europe. If, when more niche parties are added, the findings are corroborated, it would increase the robustness of the strategic explanation of niche party success. Mainstream Party Strategies: Actions Speak Louder than Words The strategies employed by mainstream parties, like the decision to accommodate or dismiss the niche issue, or take an adversarial position, in response to a niche party and its issue did not play out as expected. Party manifestoes were used to represent how much attention niche and mainstream parties paid to issues, which factored into the project both as independent and dependent variables. The mainstream parties attempt to accommodate or dismiss the niche issue as well as the "nicheness" of niche party were used as strategic components (independent variables) to help explain the percent of votes and seats received by niche parties. In addition, the attention mainstream parties pay to niche issues was also one of the three dependent variables of the project, a way to capture |
