Presuming that a strong relationship exists between one's identity and political behavior, American politicians have long targeted immigrant and ethnic communities based on their shared ethnic or racial identity. But to what extent do political campaign messages impact voters' actual decisions and behaviors? This new book is one of the first to examine and compare the campaign efforts used to target Latinos with those directed at the rest of the electorate. Specifically, it focuses on televised Spanish and English-language advertising developed for the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections, as well as for dozens of congressional and statewide contests from 2000–2004. Author Marisa Abrajano's research reveals exposure to these televised political ads indeed impacts whether Latinos turn out to vote and, if so, for whom they vote. But the effect of these advertising messages is not uniform across the Latino electorate. Abrajano explores the particular factors that affect Latinos' receptivity to political ads and offers key findings for those interested in understanding how to mobilize this critical swing group in American politics.
Making up 14.2 percent of the American population, Hispanics are now the largest minority group in the United States. Clearly, securing the Hispanic vote is more important to political parties than ever before. Yet, despite the current size of the Hispanic population, is there a clear Hispanic politics? Who are Hispanic voters? What are their political preferences and attitudes, and why? The first comprehensive study of Hispanic voters in the United States, New Faces, New Voices paints a complex portrait of this diverse and growing population. Examining race, politics, and comparative political behavior, Marisa Abrajano and R. Michael Alvarez counter the preconceived notion of Hispanic voters as one homogenous group. The authors discuss the concept of Hispanic political identity, taking into account the ethnic, generational, and linguistic distinctions within the Hispanic population. They compare Hispanic registration, turnout, and participation to those of non-Hispanics, consider the socioeconomic factors contributing to Hispanics' levels of political knowledge, determine what segment of the Hispanic population votes in federal elections, and explore the prospects for political relationships among Hispanics and non-Hispanics. Finally, the authors look at Hispanic opinions on social and economic issues, factoring in whether these attitudes are affected by generational status and ethnicity. A unique and nuanced perspective on the Hispanic electoral population, New Faces, New Voices is essential for understanding the political characteristics of the largest and fastest growing group of minority voters in the United States.
This Element examines just how much the public knows about some of America's most stigmatized social groups, who comprise 40.3% of the population, and evaluates whether misinformation matters for shaping policy attitudes and candidate support. The authors design and field an original survey containing large national samples of Black, Latino, Asian, Muslim, and White Americans, and include measures of misinformation designed to assess the amount of factual information that individuals possess about these groups. They find that Republicans, Whites, the most racially resentful, and consumers of conservative news outlets are the most likely to be misinformed about socially marginalized groups. Their analysis also indicates that misinformation predicts hostile policy support on racialized issues; it is also positively correlated with support for Trump. They then conducted three studies aimed at correcting misinformation. Their research speaks to the prospects of a well-functioning democracy, and its ramifications on the most marginalized.
White Backlash provides an authoritative assessment of how immigration is reshaping the politics of the nation. Using an array of data and analysis, Marisa Abrajano and Zoltan Hajnal show that fears about immigration fundamentally influence white Americans' core political identities, policy preferences, and electoral choices, and that these concerns are at the heart of a large-scale defection of whites from the Democratic to the Republican Party. Abrajano and Hajnal demonstrate that this political backlash has disquieting implications for the future of race relations in America. White Americans' concerns about Latinos and immigration have led to support for policies that are less generous and more punitive and that conflict with the preferences of much of the immigrant population. America's growing racial and ethnic diversity is leading to a greater racial divide in politics. As whites move to the right of the political spectrum, racial and ethnic minorities generally support the left. Racial divisions in partisanship and voting, as the authors indicate, now outweigh divisions by class, age, gender, and other demographic measures. White Backlash raises critical questions and concerns about how political beliefs and future elections will change the fate of America's immigrants and minorities, and their relationship with the rest of the nation.
Conversation theory tells us that individuals arrive at meaning through conversation (Pask 1980). Conversation is defined as "the kind of speech that happens informally, symmetrically, and for the purposes of establishing and maintaining social ties" (Thornbury and Slade 2006: 25). In this book we explore the importance of engaging in political conversation and talk within political discussion networks for developing connections that foster political engagement. Importantly, this refers to informal discussion "of politics and current events that occurs within a social network of peers: friends, colleagues, family members, and other individuals who are present in our social environment" (Klosftad 2011: 9). We understand intuitively that people might find themselves in conversations about politics or current events. We discuss what is happening in the world with friends. We discuss the latest news with colleagues in the workplace. Growing up, we depend upon our family members, teachers, and others to educate us, through conversation, about how the political system works and what our role is within it. What is so critical about these informal conversations, and one of the reasons why they are so powerful, is that they are casual and impromptu - they are typically the byproducts of people going about their daily activities and routines (Downs 1957; Walsh 2004, Klofstad et al. 2009). Yet we also know that these conversations are happening within very different community contexts; people's social environments are not all the same, particularly along the lines of ethnorace , gender, and partisanship. As the opening quote from a formerly incarcerated Latino male canvasser from the South Los Angeles organization Community Coalition indicates, the types of conversations he has within his community members, and the knowledge he gains from them, matter, and are mediated by his life experiences and those of his community. It is important to remember that the political opportunity structures that exist within those social environments vary in important ways (Meyer and Minkoff 2004). This is especially true in areas with high levels of ethnoracial segregation, which has increased in the United States, particularly among Whites (Frey 2015). This ethnoracial segregation may be correlated with partisan segregation. Because White racial identity is highly associated with Republican party identification (Jardina 2019), predominantly White communities are also likely to be predominantly Republican. Similarly, African Americans almost exclusively identify with the Democratic Party (Frymer 2010), meaning that African American communities are likely to be strongly Democratic. Thus, community composition can have political consequences in terms of determining the types of individuals with whom a person may be in conversation (e.g. Huckfeldt and Sprague 1988, p. 470; Djupe and Sokhey 2014). Beyond potential geographic homogeneity based on the correlation between ethnorace and partisanship, we know that political discussion networks are largely homogeneous in terms of partisanship (Huckfeldt et al. 2004; Mutz 2006). Political discussion networks are a subset of one's broader social network, which includes the people with whom one discusses politics (Sinclair 2012). While we know that in general Democrats tend to talk about politics with other Democrats and Republicans tend to discuss politics with other Republicans, we know less about the ethnoracial makeup of these political discussion networks. Because few studies exploring political discussion networks include diverse samples, we know even less about how the partisan composition of political discussion networks varies across non-white groups, with the exception of some pioneering work by Leighley and Matsubayashi (2009). It is important to consider whether the presumed benefits of political discussion networks are afforded to all groups in the same ways. For instance, research has found that one of the main benefits of political discussion networks is that individuals are exposed to information about politics. When discussion networks are homogeneous, however, individuals are likely to be exposed to information from only one perspective. Being embedded in a political echo chamber can affect how individuals interpret political information. Studies have shown that party identification can affect individuals' willingness to believe certain claims, what Bolsen et al. (2013) call partisan motivated reasoning. Research suggests that social media may be exacerbating these trends, with the result that people tend to be connected to, and receive information from, those that share their interests (Bisgin et al. 2010; but see Settle 2018; Garrett 2009a, 2009b; Stroud 2008). ""--
Presuming that a strong relationship exists between one's identity and political behavior, American politicians have long targeted immigrant and ethnic communities based on their shared ethnic or racial identity. But to what extent do political campaign messages impact voters' actual decisions and behaviors? This new book is one of the first to examine and compare the campaign efforts used to target Latinos with those directed at the rest of the electorate. Specifically, it focuses on televised Spanish and English-language advertising developed for the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections, as well as for dozens of congressional and statewide contests from 2000–2004. Author Marisa Abrajano's research reveals exposure to these televised political ads indeed impacts whether Latinos turn out to vote and, if so, for whom they vote. But the effect of these advertising messages is not uniform across the Latino electorate. Abrajano explores the particular factors that affect Latinos' receptivity to political ads and offers key findings for those interested in understanding how to mobilize this critical swing group in American politics.
This Element examines just how much the public knows about some of America's most stigmatized social groups, who comprise 40.3% of the population, and evaluates whether misinformation matters for shaping policy attitudes and candidate support. The authors design and field an original survey containing large national samples of Black, Latino, Asian, Muslim, and White Americans, and include measures of misinformation designed to assess the amount of factual information that individuals possess about these groups. They find that Republicans, Whites, the most racially resentful, and consumers of conservative news outlets are the most likely to be misinformed about socially marginalized groups. Their analysis also indicates that misinformation predicts hostile policy support on racialized issues; it is also positively correlated with support for Trump. They then conducted three studies aimed at correcting misinformation. Their research speaks to the prospects of a well-functioning democracy, and its ramifications on the most marginalized.
Making up 14.2 percent of the American population, Hispanics are now the largest minority group in the United States. Clearly, securing the Hispanic vote is more important to political parties than ever before. Yet, despite the current size of the Hispanic population, is there a clear Hispanic politics? Who are Hispanic voters? What are their political preferences and attitudes, and why? The first comprehensive study of Hispanic voters in the United States, New Faces, New Voices paints a complex portrait of this diverse and growing population. Examining race, politics, and comparative political behavior, Marisa Abrajano and R. Michael Alvarez counter the preconceived notion of Hispanic voters as one homogenous group. The authors discuss the concept of Hispanic political identity, taking into account the ethnic, generational, and linguistic distinctions within the Hispanic population. They compare Hispanic registration, turnout, and participation to those of non-Hispanics, consider the socioeconomic factors contributing to Hispanics' levels of political knowledge, determine what segment of the Hispanic population votes in federal elections, and explore the prospects for political relationships among Hispanics and non-Hispanics. Finally, the authors look at Hispanic opinions on social and economic issues, factoring in whether these attitudes are affected by generational status and ethnicity. A unique and nuanced perspective on the Hispanic electoral population, New Faces, New Voices is essential for understanding the political characteristics of the largest and fastest growing group of minority voters in the United States.
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.