Dumping Trump and Electoral Bumps: The Causes and Consequences of Republican Officeholders’ Endorsement Decisions

Abstract

Abstract Endorsement of the party’s nominee by the vast majority of that party’s top elected officials is a foregone conclusion in most presidential campaigns. But in 2016, Republican lawmakers were slow to endorse Donald Trump, lackluster in their enthusiasm, and a substantial number never endorsed or withdrew their endorsements by the campaign’s end. What explains lawmakers’ decisions to endorse, and the timing and strength of their endorsements? I find that primary endorsements were most likely to come from anti-immigration moderates, but as the campaign wore on, conservatives and members from more Republican districts became more supportive in their endorsements. Women were highly influenced by the release of the Access Hollywood tape, while Ted Cruz’s endorsers were stingy in their support until Cruz himself issued a late September endorsement. To see if these endorsement decisions made a difference in the election, I compare the performance of endorsers and non-endorsers in the 2016 congressional elections, and I compare Trump’s performance in districts in which he was endorsed to those in which he wasn’t. Rather than the traditional presidential coattails, I find evidence of negative coattails and reverse coattails. Endorsers did about 1.7 percentage points worse than non-endorsers, while Trump did 1.4 percentage points better in districts where the incumbent Republican endorsed him.