Demographic shifts, voter fears, and presidential voting

November 19, 2019

Did Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign benefit from voters' fears of immigrants in communities experiencing greater demographic change?

New research shows the answer is "no," a finding that contradicts the conventional wisdom and which surprised even the political scientists who conducted the study. Instead, those communities actually moved more toward the pro-immigration Democratic candidate.

In a paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, political scientists Daniel J. Hopkins of the University of Pennsylvania, Seth J. Hill of the University of California, San Diego, and Gregory A. Huber of Yale University, describe their novel approach to the question.

They were looking to see if demographic changes from 2012 to 2016 shifted voters toward an anti-immigration presidential candidate.

Rather than look at large geographic areas like counties, as previous studies have, they analyzed a much smaller section of communities: voting precincts.

The challenge with using U.S. counties to study the question is that some are sparsely populated and others have millions of residents, says Hopkins. He and his colleagues wanted to drill down to a more precise and local level.

Hopkins has been studying the question of local demographic changes and influxes of immigrants for years. His prior work and that of others has indicated that those changes should be expected to produce shifts in local politics, he says.

"One of the key things I've found is that people, in explaining their unease about immigration, talk about very local encounters. They say it's challenging to see all of the grocery store signs in Spanish, or that on the phone the bank asked them if they wanted to 'Press 1' for English or 'Press 2' for Spanish," he says. "We were very interested in whether local demographic changes were part of the explanation for the election of Donald Trump, and more generally for the rise in anti-immigration populist political parties and candidates in recent years."

The three researchers teamed up to collect the deep and unique data set. They compiled election results and demographic measures for more than 26,000 precincts in Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Washington.

They chose states that were large, diverse, and politically contested and that jointly captured some of the key demographics that drive American politics: States with large cities like Pennsylvania; western states with large Latino or Asian American populations like Washington; key northeastern and midwestern post-industrial states that were decisive in 2016, like Ohio and Michigan; and larger southern states with very diverse populations, like Florida and Georgia.

They had to work with secretaries of state and state election offices to get individual-level voter turnout data, and then they worked with those offices or other scholars to identify precinct-level electoral data. Precincts are quite small, often with just 1,000 voters, and the researchers contended they would be a much better measure of people's local, lived experiences in their immediate communities.

"A common argument for why candidate Trump won the 2016 election is that he benefited from local demographic changes in the lives of native whites. Our evidence does not support that argument," Hill says. "While it is possible Trump benefited from anti-immigrant sentiment, in the states we examined his vote gains relative to 2012 do not seem to follow from Americans' local lived experience with immigration or demographic change."

Meanwhile, Trump's opponent Hillary Clinton saw increases in votes in precincts with growing shares of Hispanics and immigrants. While the authors cannot make a causal claim about why Clinton benefited, they use their precinct observations to show that even in precincts that strongly voted Republican in 2012, increasing diversity led to movement toward Clinton. This implies the overall pattern was not generated simply by immigrants and Hispanics moving exclusively into already heavily Democratic precincts.

"It may be that native-born citizens have some discomfort with demographic change but that discomfort either declines over time or it is not as important for their presidential-vote choice as factors such as policy views or candidate characteristics," Hill says.

Nationalization is a powerful trend, Hopkins says, and immigration-related political appeals can resonate in a wide range of different communities.

"We're not saying that demographic change doesn't reshape our politics, but what we are saying is that demographic changes at the local level do not seem to be what drove many voters to Donald Trump."
-end-
Daniel J. Hopkins is a professor in the Political Science Department at the University of Pennsylvania, with a secondary appointment in Penn's Annenberg School for Communication. He assists with the coordination of the Philadelphia Behavioral Science Initiative.

Seth J. Hill is an associate professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of California, San Diego.

Gregory A. Huber is the Forst Family Professor of Political Science in the Department of Political Science at Yale University.

University of Pennsylvania

Related Immigrants Articles from Brightsurf:

Immigrants who naturalize outearn their peers
Looking at municipalities in Switzerland where citizenship applications were put to a popular vote, researchers identified immigrants who narrowly won or lost and tracked their earnings over the next several decades.

US-born residents more than 5 times likely to use prescription opioids than new immigrants
The longer immigrants live in the United States, the more likely they are to use prescription opioids -- a fact that contradicts popular views linking wealth and health, and suggests that American culture is uniquely favorable toward prescribing opioids.

Length of time in US associated with immigrants' opioid use
The more time first-generation immigrants spend in the United States the more likely it appears they will use prescription opioids.

Undocumented immigrants' transplant survival rates on par with US citizens'
Unauthorized immigrants who receive liver transplants in the United States have comparable three-year survival rates to US citizens, according to a study by researchers at UC San Francisco.

Immigrants who committed felonies less likely than nonimmigrants to commit another felony
A new study compared recidivism rates of foreign-born and native-born individuals formerly incarcerated for felonies and released from prisons in Florida.

Uncovering the roots of discrimination toward immigrants
Immigrants are often encouraged to assimilate into their new culture as a way of reducing conflict with their host societies, to appear less threatening to the culture and national identity of the host population.

Immigrants: citizens' acceptance depends on questions asked
How many immigrants per year should Switzerland be prepared to welcome?

How societal attitudes, political rhetoric affect immigrants' health
For immigrants to the United States, the current political climate, and debates over issues such as a border wall, become part of the environment that influences their health, according to a new University of Washington study.

UK prejudice against immigrants amongst lowest in Europe
A new study published in Frontiers in Sociology challenges prevailing attitudes on Brexit, the nature of prejudice, and the social impact of modernization.

Research shows biases against immigrants with non-anglicized names
Using variations of the 'trolley-dilemma' where people choose who to save or not save others in a hypothetical situation, social psychologists show that for certain groups, under certain conditions in a hypothetical scenario, having an anglicized name means you're more likely to be saved than if you kept your original Asian or Arab name.

Read More: Immigrants News and Immigrants Current Events
Brightsurf.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.