A study explores factors tied to the outcome of the 2016 US presidential elections. The outcome of the 2016 US presidential election has been widely attributed to economically disadvantaged working class voters, based on an association between low education and support for the Republican candidate. Diana Mutz evaluated the hypothesis using the results of a nationally representative panel survey, in which more than 1,200 respondents answered the same questions in October 2012 and 2016. Changes in personal economic variables, such as household income, employment status, or subjective perception of personal finances, from 2012 to 2016 were not associated with changes in support for the Republican candidate. Instead, changing preferences were related to changes in the party's positions on issues related to American global dominance and the rise of a majority-minority America--issues that threaten white Americans' sense of dominant group status. The Republican candidate's perceived positions on trade and China became closer to those of the average voter in 2016 compared with 2012, and these issues led to an estimated 7% increase in the probability of voting for the Republican candidate between 2012 and 2016. Voter preferences in 2016 reflected threats felt by dominant groups and a desire to maintain America's global dominance in the face of such perceived threats, according to the author.
###
Article #17-18155: "Status threat, not economic hardship, explains the 2016 presidential vote," by Diana C. Mutz.
MEDIA CONTACT: Diana C. Mutz, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; tel: 215-898-6498, 215-410-0749; e-mail: < mutz@upenn.edu >
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences