Nothing to See Here: Republican Congressional Members’ Twitter Reactions to Donald Trump

Danielle Vinson, Jacob M. Lollis
{"title":"Nothing to See Here: Republican Congressional Members’ Twitter Reactions to Donald Trump","authors":"Danielle Vinson, Jacob M. Lollis","doi":"10.1080/07343469.2023.2174613","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract How do co-partisans respond to the President on Twitter? This article examines whether and how Republican legislators reacted to President Trump in five instances when he broke with Republican Party policy positions or norms. We theorize that legislators’ electoral environment, constituency, and identity shape their response to the president, and we test our hypotheses using nearly 2,500 hand-coded tweets from Republican legislators between 2018-2020. The overwhelming reaction by Republican legislators to Trump’s actions was to ignore him. When members did react to the president, their response was primarily driven by their electoral environment and identity. Those from the most Trump supportive districts supported the president, and retiring members were most likely to oppose him. Male legislators were much more likely to support and oppose the president, while female legislators mostly ignored him. And, if they reacted, the most ideologically extreme Republicans were more likely to support than oppose the president. The implications of these findings are troubling. Even when President Trump violated traditional norms or deviated from long held party positions, his congressional co-partisans remained silent, occasionally offering support but rarely opposition.","PeriodicalId":41473,"journal":{"name":"Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2023.2174613","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract How do co-partisans respond to the President on Twitter? This article examines whether and how Republican legislators reacted to President Trump in five instances when he broke with Republican Party policy positions or norms. We theorize that legislators’ electoral environment, constituency, and identity shape their response to the president, and we test our hypotheses using nearly 2,500 hand-coded tweets from Republican legislators between 2018-2020. The overwhelming reaction by Republican legislators to Trump’s actions was to ignore him. When members did react to the president, their response was primarily driven by their electoral environment and identity. Those from the most Trump supportive districts supported the president, and retiring members were most likely to oppose him. Male legislators were much more likely to support and oppose the president, while female legislators mostly ignored him. And, if they reacted, the most ideologically extreme Republicans were more likely to support than oppose the president. The implications of these findings are troubling. Even when President Trump violated traditional norms or deviated from long held party positions, his congressional co-partisans remained silent, occasionally offering support but rarely opposition.
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
这里没什么可看的:共和党国会议员对唐纳德·特朗普的推特反应
共和党人如何在推特上回应总统?本文考察了特朗普总统在五次违反共和党政策立场或规范时,共和党议员是否以及如何对他做出反应。我们的理论是,议员的选举环境、选区和身份塑造了他们对总统的反应,我们用2018年至2020年期间共和党议员近2500条手工编码的推文来检验我们的假设。共和党议员对特朗普的行动的压倒性反应是无视他。当成员们对总统做出反应时,他们的反应主要是由他们的选举环境和身份所驱动的。那些来自最支持特朗普的选区的人支持总统,而退休的议员最有可能反对他。男性议员支持和反对总统的可能性要大得多,而女性议员大多无视他。而且,如果他们做出反应,意识形态最极端的共和党人更有可能支持而不是反对总统。这些发现的含义令人不安。即使在特朗普总统违反传统规范或偏离长期以来的党派立场时,他的国会同僚也保持沉默,偶尔会提供支持,但很少反对。
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
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
34
期刊最新文献
Wallach, Philip A. Why Congress Wallach, Philip A. Why Congress . New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2023. 336 pages. $29.95 (hardcover). Peake, Jeffrey S. Dysfunctional Diplomacy: The Politics of International Agreements in an Era of Partisan Polarization Bird, R. Kenton, and John C. Pierce. Tom Foley: The Man in the MiddleBird, R. Kenton, and John C. Pierce. Tom Foley: The Man in the Middle . Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 2023. 256 pages. $32.95 (hardcover). Kornberg, Maya L. Inside Congressional Committees: Function and Dysfunction in the Legislative Process Herrnson, Paul S., Colton C. Campbell, and David A. Dulio, Eds. Under the Iron Dome: Congress from the Inside
×
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