Abstract
This article is an empirical analysis of the predictive power of game theoretic concepts for political behavior. It compares the Nash equilibrium solutions to the trembling-hand perfect solutions. Appropriate data for such a test come from the decisions of the Democratic and Republican parties concerning the number of candidates to nominate for cumulative voting general elections in Illinois. Using an innovation in statistical methods which allows the comparison between point and set predictions, I find that game theory is a good predictor of actual political behavior and that the Nash solution is a superior predictor to the trembling-hand perfect rule.

This publication has 18 references indexed in Scilit: