Understanding White Polarization in the 2016 Vote for President: The Sobering Role of Racism and Sexism
2018/01/01 by Brian F. Schaffner, Brian Schaffner, Matthew Macwilliams +2 · 551 citations
Social Sciences · #Electoral Systems and Political Participation #Law #Polarization (electrochemistry) #Political science #Politics #Populism, Right-Wing Movements #Presidency #Presidential election #Presidential system #Voting #White (mutation)
paper · doi:10.1002/polq.12737
published in Political Science Quarterly 133(1), 9-34 (Oxford University Press)
openalex publication_date 2018/01/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/05
Abstract
THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN FEATURED major-party candidates who both explicitly put issues of race and gender at the forefront of the discourse. Notably, 2016 also witnessed the largest gap between the presidential vote preferences of college-educated and non-college-educated whites since 1980. While Donald Trump enjoyed just a four-point margin over Hillary Clinton among whites with a college degree (10 points less than Mitt Romney’s margin over Barack Obama among that group in 2012), his advantage among non-college-educated whites was nearly 40 points.1 This gap between college-educated and non-college-educated whites was possibly the single most important divide documented in 2016, and it was the culmination of an increasing divide in party identification among college-educated and non-college-educated whites following Obama’s election in 2008.2 While many election postmortems were quick to make note of the education gap among whites in terms of presidential vote choice in 2016, explanations for the origins of this gap were a subject of significant debate. Two primary explanations have been offered. The first is that white working-class Americans were left behind during the economic recovery that took place during the Obama presidency, and Trump’s populist economic message, focusing on protectionism and other policies to help working people, resonated with this feeling.3 A second explanation is that Trump’s willingness to make explicitly racist and sexist appeals during the campaign, coupled with the presence of an African American president and the first major-party female nominee, made racism and sexism a dividing line in the vote in this election.4 This led less educated whites, who tend to exhibit higher levels of sexism and racism, to support Trump, while more educated whites were more supportive of Clinton.5
Cited by
- Selecting for Masculinity: Women’s Under-Representation in the Republican Party
- Partisan bias and evaluations of women in Congress
- The Impact of Donald Trump’s Presidency on the Well-Being of African Americans
- Plutopopulism: Wealth and Trump’s Financial Base
- Online Political Discourse in the Trump Era
- The Symbolic Politics of Status in the MAGA Movement
- Sexism as a Predictor of Political Attitudes and Voting Behavior: A Systematic Review
- Disentangling different types of sexist attitudes and vote choice in Germany
- Social Mobility through Immigrant Resentment: Explaining Latinx Support for Restrictive Immigration Policies and Anti-immigrant Candidates
- Antisemitism, Israel, and political ideology on the American college campus
- Racial prejudice, education, and views of climate change
- Place-Based Resentment in Contemporary U.S. Elections: The Individual Sources of America’s Urban-Rural Divide
- Racism as a Public Health Crisis: How Declarations Shape Local TV News Attention to Racism
- Whitewashing Women Voters: Intersectionality and Partisan Vote Choice in the 2020 US Presidential Election
- Keep America Christian (and White): Christian Nationalism, Fear of Ethnoracial Outsiders, and Intention to Vote for Donald Trump in the 2020 Presidential Election
- Mobilizing the White: White Nationalism and Congressional Politics in the American South
- Division Does Not Imply Predictability: Demographics Continue to Reveal Little About Voting and Partisanship
- Nationally poor, locally rich: Income and local context in the 2016 presidential election
- Trump’s new America and the question of fascism
- Queering Climate Change: Exploring the Influence of LGBTQ+ Identity on Climate Change Belief and Risk Perceptions*
- Misogyny, authoritarianism, and climate change
- TRENDS: Diploma divide: Educational attainment and the realignment of the American electorate
- Complicating the Role of White Racial Attitudes and Anti-Immigrant Sentiment in the 2016 US Presidential Election
- Inequality and its discontents
- A Psychological Profile of the Alt-Right
- Polarization under rising inequality and economic decline
- "Blacklists" and "whitelists": a salutary warning concerning the prevalence of racist language in discussions of predatory publishing. [europepmc]
- Making America Great. [europepmc]
- Reducing Racial Inequities in Health: Using What We Already Know to Take Action. [europepmc]
- Underlying socio-political processes behind the 2016 US election. [europepmc]
- A Psychological Profile of the Alt-Right. [europepmc]
- Sexism, racism, and nationalism: Factors associated with the 2016 U.S. presidential election results? [europepmc]
- Reframing social categorization as latent structure learning for understanding political behaviour. [europepmc]
- Making America Great Again? National Nostalgia's Effect on Outgroup Perceptions. [europepmc]
- Are Populists Insecure About Themselves or About Their Country? Political Attitudes and Economic Perceptions. [europepmc]
- Deception Detection in Politics: Can Voters Tell When Politicians are Lying? [europepmc]
- Structural Heteropatriarchy and Birth Outcomes in the United States. [europepmc]
- Superposition strategies: How and why White people say contradictory things about race. [europepmc]
- Structural heteropatriarchy and maternal cardiovascular morbidities. [europepmc]
- Quantifying generalized trust in individuals and counties using language. [europepmc]
Related