Scholars have identified many social-psychological factors correlated with support for Donald Trump; however, attempts at modeling these factors tend to suffer from omitted variable bias on the one hand, or multicollinearity on the other. Both issues obscure inferences. Using two nationally representative surveys, we demonstrate the perils of including or failing to include many of these factors in models of Trump support. We then reconceptualize the social-psychological sources of Trump support as components of a broader “profile” of factors that explains Trump support in 2018 and vote choice in 2016, as well as attitudes about issues connected to Trump. Moreover, this profile—an amalgamation of attitudes about, for example, racial groups, immigrants, and political correctness—rivals partisanship and ideology as predictors of Trump support and is negatively related to support for mainstream Republican candidates. Our analyses suggest that Trump benefited from activating dimensions of public opinion that transcend traditional party cleavages.
AbramowitzA.McCoyJ. (2019). United States: Racial resentment, negative partisanship, and polarization in Trump’s America. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 681, 137–156.
2.
Al-GharbiM. (2018). Race and the race for the White House: On social research in the age of Trump. The American Sociologist, 49, 496–519.
3.
BarberM.PopeJ. C. (2019). Conservatism in the era of Trump. Perspectives on Politics, 17, 719–736.
4.
BartelsL. M. (2018). Partisanship in the Trump era. The Journal of Politics, 80, 1483–1494.
5.
BlairK. L. (2017). Did Secretary Clinton lose to a ‘basket of deplorables’? An Examination of islamophobia, homophobia, sexism and conservative ideology in the 2016 US presidential election. Psychology and Sexuality, 8, 334–355.
6.
BlumR. M.ParkerC. S. (2019). Trump-ing foreign affairs: Status threat and foreign policy preferences on the right. Perspectives on Politics, 17, 737–755.
7.
BracicA.Israel-TrummelM.ShortleA. F. (2019). Is sexism for white people? Gender stereotypes, race, and the 2016 presidential election. Political Behavior, 41, 281–307.
8.
BucciL. C. (2017). White working-class politics and the consequences of declining unionization in the age of Trump. Politics Groups and Identities, 5, 364–371.
9.
CarminesE. G.EnsleyM.WagnerJ. M. W. (2016). Ideological heterogeneity and the rise of Donald Trump [Paper presentation]. The Forum 2016; 14(4): 385–397. https://doi.org/10.1515/for-2016-0036
10.
CasseseE. C.HolmanM. R. (2019). Playing the woman card: Ambivalent sexism in the 2016 U.S. presidential race. Political Psychology, 40, 55–74.
11.
CassinoD. A. N. (2016). Fairleigh Dickinson University’s publicmind poll finds Trump supporters more conspiracy-minded than other republicans. Fairleigh Dickinson University.
ConwayL. G.RepkeM. A.HouckS. C. (2017). Donald Trump as a cultural revolt against perceived communication restriction: Priming political correctness norms causes more trump support. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 5(1), 244–259.
14.
CraigM. A.RuckerJ. M.RichesonJ. A. (2018). Racial and political dynamics of an approaching “majority-minority” United States. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 677, 204–214.
15.
DeckmanM.CasseseE. (2019). Gendered nationalism and the 2016 US presidential election: How party, class, and beliefs about masculinity shaped voting behavior. Politics and Gender, 1–24.
16.
DonovanT.RedlawskD. (2018). Donald Trump and right-wing populists in comparative perspective. Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties, 28, 190–207.
17.
EngelhardtA. M. (2019). Trumped by race: Explanations for race’s influence on whites’ votes in 2016. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 14, 313–328.
18.
FedericoC. M.de ZavalaA. G. (2018). Collective narcissism and the 2016 US presidential vote. Public Opinion Quarterly, 82, 110–121.
19.
FinleyL.EspositoL. (2019). The immigrant as bogeyman: Examining Donald Trump and the right’s anti-immigrant, anti-PC rhetoric. Humanity & Society, 44(2), 178–197.
20.
Frasure-YokleyL. (2018). Choosing the velvet glove: Women voters, ambivalent sexism, and vote choice in 2016. The Journal of Race Ethnicity and Politics, 3, 3–25.
21.
GreenJ.McElweeS. (2018). The differential effects of economic conditions and racial attitudes in the election of Donald Trump. Perspectives on Politics, 17, 358–379.
22.
GrossmannM.ThalerD. (2018). Mass–elite divides in aversion to social change and support for Donald Trump. American Politics Research, 46, 753–784.
23.
HetheringtonM.WeilerJ. (2018). Prius or pickup? How the answers to four simple questions explain America’s great divide. Houghton Mifflin.
24.
HoogheM.DassonnevilleR. (2018). Explaining the Trump vote: The effect of racist resentment and anti-immigrant sentiments. Political Science and Politics, 51, 528–534.
25.
HuL.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55.
26.
JamiesonK. H.TaussigD. (2017). Disruption, demonization, deliverance, and norm destruction: The rhetorical signature of Donald J. Trump. Political Science Quarterly, 132, 619–651.
27.
JardinaA. (2019). White identity politics. Cambridge University Press.
28.
KaneJ. V.MasonL.WronskiJ. (Forthcoming). Who’s at the party? Group sentiments, knowledge, and partisan identity. Journal of Politics.
29.
KlineR. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Publications.
30.
KnuckeyJ.HassanK. (2019). Authoritarianism and support for Trump in the 2016 presidential election. The Social Science Journal, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2019.06.008
31.
LajevardiN.OskooiiK. A. R. (2018). Old-fashioned racism, contemporary islamophobia, and the isolation of Muslim Americans in the age of Trump. The Journal of Race Ethnicity and Politics, 3, 112–152.
32.
Lopez BunyasiT. (2019). The role of whiteness in the 2016 presidential primaries. Perspectives on Politics, 17, 679–698.
33.
LudekeS. G.KlitgaardC. N.VitriolJ. (2018). Comprehensively-measured authoritarianism does predict vote choice: The importance of authoritarianism’s facets, ideological sorting, and the particular candidate. Personality and Individual Differences, 123, 209–216.
34.
MacWilliamsM. C. (2016). Who decides when the party doesn’t? Authoritarian voters and the rise of Donald Trump. Political Science and Politics, 49, 716–721.
35.
ManzaJ.CrowleyN. (2018). Ethnonationalism and the rise of Donald Trump. Contexts, 17, 28–33.
36.
MasonL. (2018). Uncivil agreement: How politics became our identity. University of Chicago Press.
37.
MasonL.WronskiJ. (2018). One tribe to bind them all: How our social group attachments strengthen partisanship. Political Psychology, 39, 257–277.
38.
MillerJ. M. (2020). Psychological, political, and situational factors combine to boost Covid-19 conspiracy theory beliefs. Canadian Journal of Political Science 53, 327–334. https://doi.org/10.1017/s000842392000058x
39.
MorganS. L.LeeJ. (2018). Trump voters and the white working class. Sociological Science, 5, 234–245.
40.
MutzD. C. (2018). Status threat, not economic hardship, explains the 2016 presidential vote. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115, E4330–E39.
41.
ObschonkaM.StuetzerM.RentfrowP. J.LeeN.PotterJ.GoslingS. D. (2018). Fear, populism, and the geopolitical landscape: The “sleeper effect” of neurotic personality traits on regional voting behavior in the 2016 Brexit and Trump elections. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9, 285–298.
OliverJ. E.RahnW. M. (2016). Rise of the Trumpenvolk: Populism in the 2016 election. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 667, 189–206.
44.
RenyT.CollingwoodL.ValenzuelaA. (2019). Vote switching in the 2016 election: How racial and immigration attitudes, not economics, explain shifts in white voting. Public Opinion Quarterly, 83, 91–113.
45.
SanchezJ. C. (2018). Trump, the KKK, and the versatility of white supremacy rhetoric. Journal of Contemporary Rhetoric, 8(1/2), 44–56.
46.
SchaffnerB. F.MacwilliamsM.NtetaT. (2018). Understanding white polarization in the 2016 vote for president: The sobering role of racism and sexism. Political Science Quarterly, 133(1), 9–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/polq.12737
SidesJ.TeslerM.VavreckL. (2017). The 2016 Us election: How Trump lost and won. Journal of Democracy, 28(2), 34–44. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2017.0022
49.
SidesJ.TeslerM.VavreckL. (2018). Hunting where the ducks are: Activating support for Donald Trump in the 2016 republican primary. Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties, 28(2), 135–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2018.1441849
50.
SidesJ.TeslerM.VavreckL. (2019). Identity crisis: The 2016 presidential campaign and the battle for the meaning of America. Princeton University Press.
UscinskiJ. E.KlofstadC.AtkinsonM. (2016). Why do people believe in conspiracy theories? The role of informational cues and predispositions. Political Research Quarterly, 69, 57–71. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2268782
53.
ValentinoN. A.WayneC.OcenoM. (2018). Mobilizing sexism: The interaction of emotion and gender attitudes in the 2016 US presidential election. Public Opinion Quarterly, 82(S1), 799–821. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfy003
54.
WestfallJ.YarkoniT. (2016). Statistically controlling for confounding constructs is harder than you think. PLoS One, 11(3), e0152719. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0152719
55.
WomickJ.RothmundT.AzevedoF.LauraA.JohnT. (2018). Group-based dominance and authoritarian aggression predict support for Donald Trump in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10(5), 643–652.
56.
WrightJ. D.EssesV. M. (2019). It’s security, stupid! voters’ perceptions of immigrants as a security risk predicted support for Donald Trump in the 2016 US Presidential election. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 49(1), 36–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12563
57.
YoungC.HolsteenK. (2017). Model uncertainty and robustness: A computational framework for multimodel analysis. Sociological Methods & Research, 46, 3–40.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
