This article explores the roots of electoral hyper-accountability in Central and Eastern Europe. I focus on Lithuania: a country that is a stable liberal democracy, but has re-elected none of its governments (in the same party composition) since the restoration of independence. Survey data from the Lithuanian National Election Study reveal that Lithuanian voters are constantly dissatisfied with the economy and retrospectively evaluate it worse than the objective indicators would suggest. This partially explains why the Lithuanian voters constantly turn away from the government parties at parliamentary elections. However, their subsequent choice between parliamentary and new (previously marginal) parties is another puzzle. Using the 2016 Lithuanian post-election survey, I test how retrospective voting (economic and corruption issues) and political factors (trust and satisfaction with democracy) explain vote choice between the three types of parties (governmental, oppositional, and successful new party). It appears that new parties in Lithuania capitalize on double dissatisfaction, as the logic of the punisher comprises two steps. First, due to economic discontent, she turns away from the incumbent. Second, due to political mistrust, she often turns not to the parliamentary opposition, but to new parties. An analysis of retrospective economic evaluations hints at the political roots of hyper-accountability: these two steps are connected, as dissatisfaction with democracy is a strong predictor of negative retrospective evaluations of economy. Additional analysis of the 2019 post-election survey corroborates the results and reveals that a similar logic also applies in direct presidential elections.

本文探讨了中欧和东欧选举过度问责的根源。我关注立陶宛：一个稳定的自由民主国家，但自恢复独立以来没有连任任何政府（在同一政党组成中）。立陶宛全国选举研究的调查数据显示，立陶宛选民不断对经济不满意，并且对经济的回顾性评估比客观指标所显示的要差。这部分解释了为什么立陶宛选民在议会选举中不断远离政府政党。然而，他们随后在议会和新的（以前是边缘的）政党之间的选择是另一个难题。使用 2016 年立陶宛选举后调查，我测试了追溯投票（经济和腐败问题）和政治因素（对民主的信任和满意度）如何解释三种类型的政党（政府、反对党和成功的新政党）之间的投票选择。立陶宛的新政党似乎利用了双重不满，因为惩罚者的逻辑包括两个步骤。首先，由于经济上的不满，她背离了现任者。其次，由于政治上的不信任，她往往不会转向议会反对派，而是转向新政党。对回顾性经济评估的分析暗示了过度问责的政治根源：这两个步骤是相互关联的，因为对民主的不满是负面回顾性经济评估的有力预测因素。