Race and policing in the 2016 presidential election: Black lives matter, the police, and dog whistle politics

Abstract

A series of deaths of Black Americans at the hands of the police sparked mass protests, received extensive media coverage, and fueled a new civil rights movement in the years leading up to the 2016 presidential election. Both major party nominees campaigned on issues of race and policing in different ways. Drawing on colorblind racism theories and the history of law‐and‐order politics, we explore how views of race relations and the police were associated with voting behavior. We ask, on the one hand, whether people were engaged with the civil rights issues raised by Black Lives Matter and, on the other hand, whether Trump's expressions of support for the police functioned as a racial “dog whistle” to mobilize a particular set of voters. Using the 2016 American National Election Studies (ANES) Time Series Study, we find that concern about biased policing and support for the civil rights movement seeking to address it were associated with increased turnout among Democrats and more votes for Clinton. In addition, consistent with a dog whistle effect, claims of supporting the police were connected to votes for Trump mainly among those with high levels of racial resentment. We conclude by discussing the symbolic role of police in American society and politics.

Whose lives mattered? How White and Black Americans felt about Black Lives Matter in 2016

“…In 2016, Donald Trump appeared to make direct appeals to these voters who felt left behind by structural economic changes and believed that racial minorities were “cutting the line” with the assistance of the federal government to gain the benefits of the American Dream (e.g., Abramowitz & McCoy, 2019; Drakulich et al, 2017; Hochschild, 2016; Sides et al, 2018). In fact, expressions of support for the police appeared to function as a racist dog whistle, predicting support for Donald Trump only among those high in racial resentment (Drakulich et al, 2020). In short, political frames of the movement may have shaped public opinion both along party lines and in ways that resonated with those who have concerns about the relative status of Black and white Americans.…”

“…Public opinion about the central concerns of the movement had political relevance in the 2016 election (e.g. Drakulich et al, 2017Drakulich et al, , 2020, and of course has broader consequences for the future of the country's racial divide.…”

“…the police and race-remain predictive even when politics are included. Those identifying as politically conservative and as a Republican were less likely to feel warmly toward BLM-not surprising given the racialized and partisan use of BLM as an issue in the 2016 election (e.g., Drakulich et al, 2017Drakulich et al, , 2020Updegrove et al, 2018). In particular, identification as Republican was strongly associated with reduced affection for BLM.…”

Enhancing City Sustainability through Smart Technologies: A Framework for Automatic Pre-Emptive Action to Promote Safety and Security Using Lighting and ICT-Based Surveillance

“…On the other hand, AI is as good as the data it learns from. We live in the reality of systematic racism and inequalities hardwired in our societal structure [124,125]. Therefore, bias and discrimination can be inherent to the data sources used [126], which causes the descriptive model to be flawed, hence the prediction becomes unreliable and preventative measures become ineffective or inadequate.…”

Does Protest “Distract” Athletes from Performing?: Evidence from the National Anthem Demonstrations in the National Football League

“…The relative reluctance of non-Black players to protest, if not for the cause then at least in support of their Black teammates, may be disappointing though not unexpected. White Americans in particular have historically viewed racial injustice as a problem to be solved by people of color themselves, including outright resistance to challenging violent police action against racial minorities (e.g., Drakulich et al 2020;Intravia et al, 2018;Wheelock et al, 2019). From a team performance perspective, some players may actively believe in the distraction hypothesis and therefore avoid political acts they views as being divisive in the locker room.…”