Nasty women and bad hombres: the effect of racial and gender resentment on evaluations of presidential candidate valence

Abstract

ABSTRACT The competence, integrity, and experience of political candidates, i.e., their character valence, play an important role in voter decision-making. As character valence reflects the ability of a candidate to govern effectively and honestly – traits all voters generally value regardless of partisanship – candidates with higher valence should have an advantage in elections, yet 2016 saw candidates struggle to capitalize on their valence. Further, rhetoric in 2016 focused on the politics of resentment, the idea some groups were getting more than they deserve. We suspect the increased saliency of resentment in political campaigns affects valence evaluations of candidates, particularly when the candidates are a member of groups outside of power in our political system, including racial and ethnic minorities and women. Leveraging data from the American National Election Study, we find individuals with higher levels of resentment will more negatively assess the valence of candidates associated with the non-dominant groups, even among co-partisans, overriding their partisan tendency to view their candidate’s traits more favorably. These results suggest if resentment renders us unable to assess quality with any objectivity, candidates with less experience, acumen, and integrity may ride a wave of resentment sweeping more competent challengers away.