“You Had Better Mention All of Them:” Race and Gender Effects in Election Loss Narratives

IF 1.5 2区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Political Research Quarterly Pub Date : 2023-11-21 DOI:10.1177/10659129231217511
P. Haines, Seth Masket
{"title":"“You Had Better Mention All of Them:” Race and Gender Effects in Election Loss Narratives","authors":"P. Haines, Seth Masket","doi":"10.1177/10659129231217511","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A common explanation for Hillary Clinton’s loss in the 2016 presidential election was that she catered to minorities at the expense of the broader electorate. How does such a loss narrative influence voters' interpretation of subsequent elections? In a conjoint experiment, white and Black Democratic respondents were randomly exposed to a vignette that ascribed Democrats’ 2016 losses to their focus on identity politics. This narrative had an asymmetric effect on attitudes toward the 2020 election based on both race and gender. While it had no impact on white men’s or Black women’s understanding of why the Democrats lost the last presidential election or their candidate preferences for the next, it had a substantial impact on the electoral attitudes of white women and a moderate impact on those of Black men. Specifically, it shifted their support away from candidates committed to gender and racial equity and toward those emphasizing broad economic policies. The identity politics loss narrative thus may have acted as a self-fulfilling prophecy that advantaged white male candidates in the 2020 election.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Research Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231217511","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A common explanation for Hillary Clinton’s loss in the 2016 presidential election was that she catered to minorities at the expense of the broader electorate. How does such a loss narrative influence voters' interpretation of subsequent elections? In a conjoint experiment, white and Black Democratic respondents were randomly exposed to a vignette that ascribed Democrats’ 2016 losses to their focus on identity politics. This narrative had an asymmetric effect on attitudes toward the 2020 election based on both race and gender. While it had no impact on white men’s or Black women’s understanding of why the Democrats lost the last presidential election or their candidate preferences for the next, it had a substantial impact on the electoral attitudes of white women and a moderate impact on those of Black men. Specifically, it shifted their support away from candidates committed to gender and racial equity and toward those emphasizing broad economic policies. The identity politics loss narrative thus may have acted as a self-fulfilling prophecy that advantaged white male candidates in the 2020 election.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
"你最好把他们都提到:"选举失利叙述中的种族和性别影响
对于希拉里-克林顿在 2016 年总统大选中的失利,一种常见的解释是,她迎合了少数群体,牺牲了更广泛的选民。这种失利的说法会如何影响选民对随后选举的解读?在一项联合实验中,民主党的白人和黑人受访者随机接触到一个小故事,将民主党在 2016 年的失利归咎于他们对身份政治的关注。根据种族和性别,这种叙述对 2020 年大选的态度产生了不对称的影响。虽然它对白人男性或黑人女性理解民主党在上届总统选举中失利的原因或他们对下届总统选举候选人的偏好没有影响,但它对白人女性的选举态度产生了重大影响,对黑人男性的选举态度产生了适度影响。具体来说,它使他们的支持从致力于性别和种族平等的候选人转向了强调广泛经济政策的候选人。因此,身份政治失利论可能是一种自我实现的预言,在 2020 年大选中对白人男性候选人有利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Political Research Quarterly
Political Research Quarterly POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.80%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: Political Research Quarterly (PRQ) is the official journal of the Western Political Science Association. PRQ seeks to publish scholarly research of exceptionally high merit that makes notable contributions in any subfield of political science. The editors especially encourage submissions that employ a mixture of theoretical approaches or multiple methodologies to address major political problems or puzzles at a local, national, or global level. Collections of articles on a common theme or debate, to be published as short symposia, are welcome as well as individual submissions.
期刊最新文献
Disinformation and Regime Survival. When Congress Prevails: Veto Overrides and Legislative Fragmentation in Multiparty Legislatures Who Decides? Media, MAGA, Money, and Mentions in the 2022 Republican Primaries Fed Up: The Determinants of Public Opposition to the U.S. Federal Reserve The Role of State and National Institutional Evaluations in Fostering Collective Accountability Across the U.S. States
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1