8
useful to explain variations in satisfaction within countries. The remaining analysis
focuses on Canada, Great Britain and Australia in order to provide a window on varying
assessments of regime stability and performance.
Predictors of satisfaction with democracy
A brief examination of the distribution of respondents on satisfaction with democracy
confirms results highlighted in previous tables. Australia has far more respondents who
are ‘very satisfied’ with democracy (30.9) than either Canada (13.5) or Great Britain
(16.5). This gap narrows when one includes ‘fairly satisfied’ respondents although
Canada (62.9) still lags far behind the other polities, approximately three quarters of
whom are satisfied. The proportions of those who are dissatisfied are, by contrast, more
similar. What then, could account for the differences within and across these countries?
If we know that those who participate in elections tend to be satisfied with democracy
(Nadeau, Blais, Nevitte and Gidengil 2000, Henderson 2003) then this could account for
higher levels of satisfaction in Australia, where compulsory voting guarantees higher
levels of participation. The alternative vote could also increase satisfaction. If at least
half of all voters in a district must have backed, in some way, the eventual winner then
this reduces the total number of ‘losers’ in an electoral system. If we know that losers are
less happy with democracy then a reduction in the total number of these respondents
could also elevate levels of satisfaction. And yet this cannot explain total variations
within and across these cases.
If the political systems in Canada, Great Britain and Australia employ majoritarian
electoral systems that are grounded in constituencies, and if this geographic link between
voters and politicians is seen, by some, as a strength of the political system, then it is
worth determining whether it produces variations in satisfaction with democracy.
Furthermore, if the local competition is supposed to be significant to voters, it is worth
distinguishing not only between levels of aggregate support, but also between aggregate
and local winners and losers. In other words, candidates may back a party that eventually
won the election, but may be represented locally by a party other than their favoured
option. Voters may also have voted for an opposition party, and thus be classified as
Convention