Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Dumping Trump and Electoral Bumps: The Causes and Consequences of Republican Officeholders’ Endorsement Decisions

Dumping Trump and Electoral Bumps: The Causes and Consequences of Republican Officeholders’... AbstractEndorsement of the party’s nominee by the vast majority of that party’s top elected officials is a foregone conclusion in most presidential campaigns. But in 2016, Republican lawmakers were slow to endorse Donald Trump, lackluster in their enthusiasm, and a substantial number never endorsed or withdrew their endorsements by the campaign’s end. What explains lawmakers’ decisions to endorse, and the timing and strength of their endorsements? I find that primary endorsements were most likely to come from anti-immigration moderates, but as the campaign wore on, conservatives and members from more Republican districts became more supportive in their endorsements. Women were highly influenced by the release of the Access Hollywood tape, while Ted Cruz’s endorsers were stingy in their support until Cruz himself issued a late September endorsement. To see if these endorsement decisions made a difference in the election, I compare the performance of endorsers and non-endorsers in the 2016 congressional elections, and I compare Trump’s performance in districts in which he was endorsed to those in which he wasn’t. Rather than the traditional presidential coattails, I find evidence of negative coattails and reverse coattails. Endorsers did about 1.7 percentage points worse than non-endorsers, while Trump did 1.4 percentage points better in districts where the incumbent Republican endorsed him. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png The Forum de Gruyter

Dumping Trump and Electoral Bumps: The Causes and Consequences of Republican Officeholders’ Endorsement Decisions

The Forum , Volume 17 (2): 25 – Jul 26, 2019

Loading next page...
 
/lp/de-gruyter/dumping-trump-and-electoral-bumps-the-causes-and-consequences-of-Aw0iKvuq5W

References (31)

Publisher
de Gruyter
Copyright
©2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
ISSN
1540-8884
eISSN
1540-8884
DOI
10.1515/for-2019-0015
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

AbstractEndorsement of the party’s nominee by the vast majority of that party’s top elected officials is a foregone conclusion in most presidential campaigns. But in 2016, Republican lawmakers were slow to endorse Donald Trump, lackluster in their enthusiasm, and a substantial number never endorsed or withdrew their endorsements by the campaign’s end. What explains lawmakers’ decisions to endorse, and the timing and strength of their endorsements? I find that primary endorsements were most likely to come from anti-immigration moderates, but as the campaign wore on, conservatives and members from more Republican districts became more supportive in their endorsements. Women were highly influenced by the release of the Access Hollywood tape, while Ted Cruz’s endorsers were stingy in their support until Cruz himself issued a late September endorsement. To see if these endorsement decisions made a difference in the election, I compare the performance of endorsers and non-endorsers in the 2016 congressional elections, and I compare Trump’s performance in districts in which he was endorsed to those in which he wasn’t. Rather than the traditional presidential coattails, I find evidence of negative coattails and reverse coattails. Endorsers did about 1.7 percentage points worse than non-endorsers, while Trump did 1.4 percentage points better in districts where the incumbent Republican endorsed him.

Journal

The Forumde Gruyter

Published: Jul 26, 2019

There are no references for this article.