Sexism, racism, and nationalism: Factors associated with the 2016 U.S. presidential election results?

Abstract

After the generally unexpected outcome of the 2016 U.S. presidential election, many explanations were proposed to account for the results. Three narratives that received a considerable amount of media attention were that sexist, racist, and/or nationalist attitudes influenced voting decisions. Some empirical work has supported each of these accounts. However, sexism, racism, and nationalism are interrelated, and most studies about the 2016 election have not examined these three factors in conjunction to determine the unique contribution of each. Thus, we investigated the extent to which each factor (assessed as sexism toward women, Modern Racism, and U.S. nationalism) was uniquely related to evaluations of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, voting intentions, and actual voting behavior. Participants completed online questionnaires before (N = 489) and after (N = 192) the 2016 U.S. election. More positive evaluation of Clinton and intentions to vote for Clinton were associated with lower levels of Modern Racism. More positive evaluation of Trump was associated with greater sexism toward women, Modern Racism, and U.S. nationalism. Intent to vote for Trump was associated with greater sexism toward women and Modern Racism. However, only Modern Racism significantly predicted voting behavior. Greater Modern Racism was associated with greater likelihood of voting for Trump and lower likelihood of voting for Clinton. When considered in conjunction, Modern Racism was the most consistent predictor across the different election outcome variables. Sexism toward women and U.S. nationalism were generally not significantly related to evaluations, intentions to vote, or voting behavior when accounting for Modern Racism. Thus, our data indicate that Modern Racism was correlated with vote choice in the 2016 election.The 2016 U.S. presidential election was historic, not only because Hillary Clinton was the first female presidential candidate for a major political party, but also because of the generally surprising results. Going into the 2016 U.S. presidential election, most polls projected Hillary Clinton to win the election over Donald Trump [1]. Instead, Trump won the election with 304 PLOS ONE PLOS ONE | https://doi.

Are guns the new dog whistle? Gun control, racial resentment, and vote choice*

“…Among respondents high in racial resentment (solid line), an election candidate's connection to the Republican party dramatically increased vote probability. This is consistent with other evidence of the profound effect of racism in U.S. electoral politics generally (Drakulich et al., 2020; Shook et al., 2020; Tesler & Sears, 2010) and in recent midterm elections specifically (Schaffner, 2020).…”

“…Among respondents high in racial resentment (solid line), an election candidate's connection to the Republican party dramatically increased vote probability. This is consistent with other evidence of the profound effect of racism in U.S. electoral politics generally (Drakulich et al, 2020;Shook et al, 2020;Tesler & Sears, 2010) and in recent midterm elections specifically (Schaffner, 2020). As importantly, the adjusted predictions show that net of an election candidate's party, their receipt of funding from the NRA increased the probability that respondents high in racial resentment would vote for them.…”

“…- Kinder and Sanders (1996, p. 258) During the last 60 years, racist dog whistles and veiled racial appeals have shaped the law and criminal justice (Duxbury, 2021;Weaver, 2007) and have allowed racial prejudice to remain a dominant force in American politics despite the societal repudiation of blatant racism (Drakulich et al, 2020;Shook et al, 2020). Moreover, the last 30 years have witnessed a cumulative increase in the influence of racial resentment on electoral outcomes (Enders & Scott, 2019).…”

Hegemonic masculinity predicts 2016 and 2020 voting and candidate evaluations

“…In addition, many of the factors that predict support of President Trump are confounded with group membership. Men (versus women), White people (versus non-White people), those with relatively less (versus more) education, and Republicans (versus Democrats and Independents) are both 1) higher in racism, sexism, nationalism and 2) stronger supporters of President Trump (12). Status threat, or the increase in cultural diversity that threatens the status quo, is a broader factor that predicts support for Trump and may account for many of the aforementioned associations [specifically, those who supported Trump in the 2016 election were those who felt the hierarchy was being upended and those who perceived more discrimination against White than Black people, Christians than Muslims, and men than women (13)].…”

Public fear of protesters and support for protest policing: An experimental test of two theoretical models*

“…Also, racial resentment and political conservatism are difficult to separate. In fact, nearly 20 years ago, Beckett and Sasson (2004, p. 54) argued that race was “the organizing principle of American politics.” The interrelationship between the two has only grown in recent years (Enders & Scott, 2019; Hochschild, 2018), with research demonstrating that racial resentment is related to identification as a conservative or Republican, the expression of anti‐democratic sentiments among Republicans, and votes for former President Trump (Bartels, 2020; Graham, Cullen, et al, 2021; Jones et al., 2020; Riley & Peterson, 2019; Shook et al., 2020; Smith, 2019). In this respect, there is disagreement about whether racial resentment measures racism or political values, and about whether controlling for political values is sufficient to isolate the anti‐Black dimension of racial resentment (Rabinowitz et al., 2009).…”