IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v115y2021i2p550-567_14.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gone For Good: Deindustrialization, White Voter Backlash, and US Presidential Voting

Author

Listed:
  • BACCINI, LEONARDO
  • WEYMOUTH, STEPHEN

Abstract

Globalization and automation have contributed to deindustrialization and the loss of millions of manufacturing jobs, yielding important electoral implications across advanced democracies. Coupling insights from economic voting and social identity theory, we consider how different groups in society may construe manufacturing job losses in contrasting ways. We argue that deindustrialization threatens dominant group status, leading some white voters in affected localities to favor candidates they believe will address economic distress and defend racial hierarchy. Examining three US presidential elections, we find white voters were more likely to vote for Republican challengers where manufacturing layoffs were high, whereas Black voters in hard-hit localities were more likely to vote for Democrats. In survey data, white respondents, in contrast to people of color, associated local manufacturing job losses with obstacles to individual upward mobility and with broader American economic decline. Group-based identities help explain divergent political reactions to common economic shocks.

Suggested Citation

  • Baccini, Leonardo & Weymouth, Stephen, 2021. "Gone For Good: Deindustrialization, White Voter Backlash, and US Presidential Voting," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 115(2), pages 550-567, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:115:y:2021:i:2:p:550-567_14
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055421000022/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Andrés Rodríguez-Pose & Javier Terrero-Dávila & Neil Lee, 2023. "Left-behind versus unequal places: interpersonal inequality, economic decline and the rise of populism in the USA and Europe," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(5), pages 951-977.
    2. Stutzmann, Sophia, 2024. "The electoral consequences of the coal phase-out in Germany," Working Papers 26, University of Konstanz, Cluster of Excellence "The Politics of Inequality. Perceptions, Participation and Policies".
    3. Anand, Kartik & Gai, Prasanna & König, Philipp J., 2023. "Leaping into the dark: A model of policy gambles," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 457-476.
    4. Apoorva Lal & Mac Lockhart & Yiqing Xu & Ziwen Zu, 2023. "How Much Should We Trust Instrumental Variable Estimates in Political Science? Practical Advice Based on Over 60 Replicated Studies," Papers 2303.11399, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2023.
    5. Barry Watson & Stephen Law & Lars Osberg, 2022. "Are Populists Insecure About Themselves or About Their Country? Political Attitudes and Economic Perceptions," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 159(2), pages 667-705, January.
    6. Baccini, Leonardo & Lodefalk, Magnus & Sabolová, Radka, 2024. "Economic Determinants of Attitudes Toward Migration: Firm-level Evidence from Europe," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 78(1), pages 67-102, January.
    7. Kellermann, Kim Leonie, 2024. "Trust we lost: The impact of the Treuhand experience on political alienation in East Germany," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 54-75.
    8. Moland, Martin, 2024. "Comparing elite and citizen attitudes towards the differentiated implementation of EU law: Evidence from a large-N survey of citizens, politicians and bureaucrats," SocArXiv d8vbq, Center for Open Science.
    9. Ferrara, Federico, 2023. "Why does import competition favor republicans? Localized trade shocks and cultural backlash in the US," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 111961, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:115:y:2021:i:2:p:550-567_14. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.