Racial tensions surged back onto the American political agenda during the 2016 election. Following numerous mass protests and sporadic riots sparked by the deaths of people of color at the hands of police officers, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump took opposite positions on the “law and order” issue. Clinton expressed empathy with communities of color, condemned systemic racism, and called for criminal justice reform. Trump portrayed crime as an out-of-control problem, expressed solidarity with police, and condemned Black Lives Matter protesters. Critics argued that Trump’s disparagement of black protesters was merely one facet of his broader use of dog whistle rhetoric designed to appeal to white voters who harbored racial resentment. However, in new research, we find that publicly “naming” dog whistle rhetoric can restore Civil Rights norms and make people less willing to be “lumped together” with a candidate who has been called out for racist tactics—making people “shy” about claiming to support said candidate. CONT.
Kevin H. Wozniak, Brian R. Calfano & Kevin M. Drakulich, LSE USAPP