I’ve always read about the incumbent advantage, but I don’t understand why that would exist. Wouldn’t an incumbent have to demonstrate what s/he has accomplished in office versus a newcomer who could make any claim since the burden of proof won’t be on them?
In: Other
The incumbent is the devil you know. You know who they are and sort of what to expect from them. People are less likely to be familiar with a challenger. A challenger will usually campaign on the changes they plan to make to the current system – a surprising number of people are uncomfortable with changes, even if the change winds up being an improvement.
I think it’s literally that the incumbent is known, people know what to expect, no surprises
Latest Answers