This paper examines the extent to which ambivalent sexism toward women influenced vote choice among American women during the 2016 Presidential election. I examine how this varied between white women and women of color. The 2016 American National Election Study (ANES) features several measures from the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI)—a scale developed by Glick and Fiske (1996) to assess sexist attitudes toward women. An index of these measures is used to examine the extent to which ambivalent sexist attitudes influenced women's vote choice for Donald Trump, controlling for racial resentment, partisanship, attitudes toward immigrants, economic anxiety, and socio-demographics. On the one hand, my findings indicate that ambivalent sexism was a powerful influence on women's Presidential vote choice in 2016, controlling for other factors. However, this finding, based on a model ofall women votersis misleading, once an intersectional approach is undertaken. Once the data are disaggregated by gender and race, white women's political behavior proves very different than women of color. Among white women, ambivalent sexist views positively and significantly predicts vote choice for Trump, controlling for all other factors. However, for women of color, this relationship was negative and posed no statistical significant relationship to voting for Trump. Scholarship in gender and politics that does not account for group differences in race/ethnicity may present misleading results, which are either underestimated or overestimated.
This article examines the extent to which economic attitudes, political predispositions, neighborhood context, and socio-demographic factors influence views toward adult, undocumented immigrants living and working in the United States. We specifically examine how these factors differ for respondents living in various types of American urban, suburban, and rural areas. Arguably, in the aftermath of the 2016 Presidential election, public opinion toward often racialized immigration policy proposals is incomplete without an understanding of the role of place and geographic identity. In the 2016 general election, 62 percent of rural voters cast a ballot for Trump, as compared with 50 percent of suburban voters, and 35 percent of urban voters. However, we know little about how their views toward undocumented immigration, a persistent hot-button issue, varied by geographic type. Our findings suggest that views toward undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the United States are conditioned by factors related to a respondent’s geographic type. We find that attitudes toward immigrants vary considerably across place. These findings provide support to our argument about the development of a geographic-based identity that has considerable impact on important public opinion attitudes, even after controlling for more traditional explanatory factors.
Racial and Ethnic Politics in American Suburbs examines racial and ethnic politics outside traditional urban contexts and questions the standard theories we use to understand mobility and government responses to rapid demographic change and political demands. This study moves beyond traditional scholarship in urban politics, departing from the persistent treatment of racial dynamics in terms of a simple black-white binary. Combining an interdisciplinary, multi-method, and multiracial approach with a well-integrated analysis of multiple forms of data including focus groups, in-depth interviews, and census data, Racial and Ethnic Politics in American Suburbs explains how redistributive policies and programs are developed and implemented at the local level to assist immigrants, racial/ethnic minorities, and low-income groups - something that given earlier knowledge and theorizing should rarely happen. Lorrie Frasure-Yokley relies on the framework of suburban institutional interdependency (SII), which presents a new way of thinking systematically about local politics within the context of suburban political institutions in the United States today.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.