  Manipulation models for electoral systems are a core research theme in social
choice theory; they include bribery (unweighted, weighted, swap, shift, ...),
control (by adding or deleting voters or candidates), lobbying in referenda and
others.
  We develop a unifying framework for manipulation models with few types of
people, one of the most commonly studied scenarios. A critical insight of our
framework is to separate the descriptive complexity of the voting rule R from
the number of types of people. This allows us to finally settle the
computational complexity of R-Swap Bribery, one of the most fundamental
manipulation problems. In particular, we prove that R-Swap Bribery is
fixed-parameter tractable when R is Dodgson's rule and Young's rule, when
parameterized by the number of candidates. This way, we resolve a long-standing
open question from 2007 which was explicitly asked by Faliszewski et al. [JAIR
40, 2011].
  Our algorithms reveal that the true hardness of bribery problems often stems
from the complexity of the voting rules. On one hand, we give a fixed-parameter
algorithm parameterized by number of types of people for complex voting rules.
Thus, we reveal that R-Swap Bribery with Dodgson's rule is much harder than
with Condorcet's rule, which can be expressed by a conjunction of linear
inequalities, while Dodson's rule requires quantifier alternation and a bounded
number of disjunctions of linear systems. On the other hand, we give an
algorithm for quantifier-free voting rules which is parameterized only by the
number of conjunctions of the voting rule and runs in time polynomial in the
number of types of people. This way, our framework explains why Shift Bribery
is polynomial-time solvable for the plurality voting rule, making explicit that
the rule is simple in that it can be expressed with a single linear inequality,
and that the number of voter types is polynomial.
