Campaign Context and Preference Dynamics in U.S. Presidential Elections

Abstract

Previous scholarship finds that campaigns “matter” in that these enterprises have the capacity to influence voter preferences. Insights about how campaigns exert effects on preferences are less abundant, however. In this paper, we elaborate a theory of campaign effects that proposes campaigns matter, at least in part, because they function as a filter to mediate the impact of events. By amplifying and reinforcing the impact of relevant events, campaigns help voters process campaign developments, permitting citizens to form, crystallize or update candidate preferences. In quadrennial presidential contests, active campaigns are generally limited to battleground states, setting up natural experiments that allow scholars to investigate the claim that competitiveness influences campaign dynamics by generating vigorous campaigns that intensify the impact of events. We examine this hypothesis by comparing the dynamics of voter preferences for U.S. president in battleground and non-battleground states in the fall 2008 campaign using statewide survey data. The results confirm our hypothesis by showing that events exerted both short- and longer-term effects in battleground states, while any impact on voter sentiment in non-battleground states was short-lived.