American Politics Research

Publisher:: Sage Publications, Inc.
Publication date:: 2021-10-06

ISBN:: 1532-673X

Issue Number

Latest documents

Public Attitudes Toward Immigration: Was There a Trump Effect?
This paper examines public opinion about immigration policy in 2012 and 2016, seeking to understand whether there are meaningful differences in public opinion across these elections, whether the predictors of opinion changed, and whether the issue’s salience grew. One prominent candidate for explaining differences in opinion about immigration in 2016 is the rhetoric of Donald J. Trump, whose presidential candidacy was launched with an attack on immigration from Mexico. We analyze content from Trump’s campaign speeches and from Mitt Romney’s 2012 campaign speeches to compare the emphasis on immigration themes, finding that Trump talked far more about immigration than Romney did. We also examine media coverage and find a marked increase in mentions of the immigration issue, which should, in theory, lead to more people seeing immigration as an important problem. We analyze “most important problem” questions from American National Election Studies surveys and find that mentions of immigration increased from less than one percent in 2012 to about five percent in 2016. However, we find that the overall distribution of public opinion about immigration changed very little from 2012 to 2016. Multivariate models show that the predictors of opinion about immigration policies were primarily the same in 2016 as in 2012: a combination of perceived economic threat, perceived cultural threat, and ethnic prejudice. In addition, models of presidential vote choice find that immigration issues were statistically significant predictors in 2016 but not in 2012. All of this suggests that Trump’s 2016 candidacy did not persuade so much as it activated. Trump’s rhetoric did not significantly alter American public opinion on immigration. Still, his emphasis on the immigration issue did garner increased media coverage and was attractive to many Republican and conservative voters who already held anti-immigration views.
Public Attitudes Toward Immigration: Was There a Trump Effect?
This paper examines public opinion about immigration policy in 2012 and 2016, seeking to understand whether there are meaningful differences in public opinion across these elections, whether the predictors of opinion changed, and whether the issue’s salience grew. One prominent candidate for explaining differences in opinion about immigration in 2016 is the rhetoric of Donald J. Trump, whose presidential candidacy was launched with an attack on immigration from Mexico. We analyze content from Trump’s campaign speeches and from Mitt Romney’s 2012 campaign speeches to compare the emphasis on immigration themes, finding that Trump talked far more about immigration than Romney did. We also examine media coverage and find a marked increase in mentions of the immigration issue, which should, in theory, lead to more people seeing immigration as an important problem. We analyze “most important problem” questions from American National Election Studies surveys and find that mentions of immigration increased from less than one percent in 2012 to about five percent in 2016. However, we find that the overall distribution of public opinion about immigration changed very little from 2012 to 2016. Multivariate models show that the predictors of opinion about immigration policies were primarily the same in 2016 as in 2012: a combination of perceived economic threat, perceived cultural threat, and ethnic prejudice. In addition, models of presidential vote choice find that immigration issues were statistically significant predictors in 2016 but not in 2012. All of this suggests that Trump’s 2016 candidacy did not persuade so much as it activated. Trump’s rhetoric did not significantly alter American public opinion on immigration. Still, his emphasis on the immigration issue did garner increased media coverage and was attractive to many Republican and conservative voters who already held anti-immigration views.
“Economic Insecurity and the Racial Attitudes of White Americans”
The two dominant paradigms in the study of white Americans’ racial attitudes—symbolic racism and group position theory—while fundamentally differing with regard to theoretical orientations and causal emphases, concur in their rejection of individual-level economic circumstances—typically operationalized through either conventional measures of class or direct racial threats to whites’ personal lives—as a meaningful determinant of whites’ racial attitudes. This article argues that these existing measures do not sufficiently consider the subjective dimension of individuals’ economic well-being. As such, conclusions drawn from the relative lack of association between these measures and racial attitudes are likely overstated. Utilizing a measure of affective economic insecurity—anxiety concerning one’s economic circumstances—a strong correlative relationship is shown to exist between this dimension of individual-level economic circumstances and whites’ racial attitudes. Specifically, it is shown that affective economic insecurity is related to whites’ level of racial resentment, their perception of racialized labor market competition, and their attitudes toward immigration. A causal relationship between affective economic insecurity and perceptions of racialized labor market competition is established through an original survey experiment.
“Economic Insecurity and the Racial Attitudes of White Americans”
The two dominant paradigms in the study of white Americans’ racial attitudes—symbolic racism and group position theory—while fundamentally differing with regard to theoretical orientations and causal emphases, concur in their rejection of individual-level economic circumstances—typically operationalized through either conventional measures of class or direct racial threats to whites’ personal lives—as a meaningful determinant of whites’ racial attitudes. This article argues that these existing measures do not sufficiently consider the subjective dimension of individuals’ economic well-being. As such, conclusions drawn from the relative lack of association between these measures and racial attitudes are likely overstated. Utilizing a measure of affective economic insecurity—anxiety concerning one’s economic circumstances—a strong correlative relationship is shown to exist between this dimension of individual-level economic circumstances and whites’ racial attitudes. Specifically, it is shown that affective economic insecurity is related to whites’ level of racial resentment, their perception of racialized labor market competition, and their attitudes toward immigration. A causal relationship between affective economic insecurity and perceptions of racialized labor market competition is established through an original survey experiment.
Perceived Local Population Dynamics and Immigration Policy Views
How do perceptions of local immigrant populations influence immigration policy views? Building on findings that Americans may not accurately perceive population dynamics, we argue that objective measures do not fully capture the effects of local context on public opinion. Our research uses novel subjective experimental reminders about current levels of and recent changes in local immigrant populations to explore how these perceptions impact immigration policy views. In a survey experiment, we asked 2,400 Americans to consider current levels of or recent changes in their local immigrant population. Asking subjects to consider current levels of local immigrant populations modestly increases support for pro-immigrant policies, with particularly strong effects among non-White and Republicans. These effects may be driven by positive perceptions of immigrants and have implications for understanding the role of local community frames in shaping public opinion about immigration, particularly for groups who do not typically support permissive immigration policies.
Perceived Local Population Dynamics and Immigration Policy Views
How do perceptions of local immigrant populations influence immigration policy views? Building on findings that Americans may not accurately perceive population dynamics, we argue that objective measures do not fully capture the effects of local context on public opinion. Our research uses novel subjective experimental reminders about current levels of and recent changes in local immigrant populations to explore how these perceptions impact immigration policy views. In a survey experiment, we asked 2,400 Americans to consider current levels of or recent changes in their local immigrant population. Asking subjects to consider current levels of local immigrant populations modestly increases support for pro-immigrant policies, with particularly strong effects among non-White and Republicans. These effects may be driven by positive perceptions of immigrants and have implications for understanding the role of local community frames in shaping public opinion about immigration, particularly for groups who do not typically support permissive immigration policies.
It’s About Hate: Approval of Donald Trump, Racism, Xenophobia and Support for Political Violence
Is approval of Donald J. Trump associated with support for political violence? If so, what explains the link between Trump approval and political violence? Using an original, nationally representative survey of over 1,500 adults in the United States we produce two findings. First, individuals who express approval for Trump are also significantly more likely to endorse positive descriptors for the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol and are more likely express support for the use of political violence more broadly. Second, the effects of Trump approval on support for the use of political violence are mediated through racist and xenophobic attitudes. Trump supporters in the study disproportionately exhibit racist and xenophobic/anti-foreigner attitudes, and these attitudes are associated with a positive endorsement of both January 6 and the use of political violence.
Professed Democracy Support and Openness to Politically Congenial Authoritarian Actions Within the American Public
Elites degrade democracy in part because of incentives that arise from public opinion. We report pre-registered and exploratory tests of which Americans are most likely to support democracy-degrading action, focusing on three distinct democracy attitudes assessed in a large demographically representative sample 5 weeks before the 2020 election. Professed opposition to democracy was relatively rare and most common among citizens who felt disengaged with politics. But a different pattern of findings emerged for attitudes toward (1) flagrant, politically congenial authoritarian policy action and (2) election subversion framed with a pro-democracy justification. These anti-democratic attitudes were relatively common, related to cultural conservatism among both Republicans and Democrats, and – consistent with an “involved-but-ignorant” hypothesis – highest among those who combined strong political interest with low political sophistication. We recommend an increased focus on attitudes toward flagrant, contextualized, and politically cued authoritarian actions, including actions framed in pro-democracy terms.
The Relationship Between Racial Attitudes and Perceived Economic Threat Among Whites: A Three Study Analysis
Multiple theoretical orientations propose a link between economic anxiety and racial attitudes. This article explores this link using three studies. The first study uses observational data from the 2016 CCES and ANES to determine whether or not anticipating a loss in income in the coming year is associated with negative racial affect. The second study uses observational data from the 2020 CCES to determine whether or not perceiving a greater risk of personal discrimination is associated with racial resentment. The last uses an original survey experiment from the 2020 CCES to gain insight into how priming intergroup competition shapes whites’ racial attitudes. These studies find an association between perceived economic threat and negative racial attitudes. However, the way respondents perceive economic threats seems to be largely shaped by partisan identification with Republicans perceiving greater levels of threat. They also suggest that material and symbolic threats may be mutually reinforcing. These findings support the claim that racial attitudes are deeply connected to economic anxieties and provide insight into how party identification shapes our psychology.
It’s About Hate: Approval of Donald Trump, Racism, Xenophobia and Support for Political Violence
Is approval of Donald J. Trump associated with support for political violence? If so, what explains the link between Trump approval and political violence? Using an original, nationally representative survey of over 1,500 adults in the United States we produce two findings. First, individuals who express approval for Trump are also significantly more likely to endorse positive descriptors for the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol and are more likely express support for the use of political violence more broadly. Second, the effects of Trump approval on support for the use of political violence are mediated through racist and xenophobic attitudes. Trump supporters in the study disproportionately exhibit racist and xenophobic/anti-foreigner attitudes, and these attitudes are associated with a positive endorsement of both January 6 and the use of political violence.