Political statements are often described as “cheap talk” used to silence the masses in the momentum of widespread opposition to the political elite’s position which is not succeeded by long-time policy positions. However, political science lacks clarity on whether the “cheap talk” assumption is tenable. Are politicians’ verbal statements short-sighted tranquillisers? Or are they instead made with consideration of parties’ past policy promises or anticipating future pledges? While studies on parties’ mandates in manifestos and positions during election campaigns are manifold, the reasons for politicians’ statements between elections are less well known – especially in comparative perspective. This paper seeks to contribute to this debate by using data on politicians’ verbal statements after the Fukushima nuclear accident and party manifesto positions prior and after it in 12 advanced democracies collected within the ResponsiveGov project.
