Presidential Scandals and Party Loyalty

Presidential Scandals and Party Loyalty Abstract “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose any voters, OK? It's like incredible." Typology This paper takes advantage of the unique aspects of Trump’s Presidency to design and implement a survey-experiment testing various categories of scandals. Although the findings are limited to the current Presidency, the paper contributes to the literature through its categorization of Trump’s scandals, and its application of those categories in an experimental design. The results indicate no significance for any type of scandal; raising questions regarding polarization in the country, and media outlets’ extensive coverage of such scandals. Negative partisanship is also examined here as a potential explanation for the high levels of party loyalty seen in the Republican Party – although the results in that area are similarly insignificant. Further research should be done to draw out precise movements among true independents and understand how positive and negative partisanship interact with one another in generating party loyalty. Categorization Personally profiting off of financial impropriety Trump uses the power of his office to financially benefit himself Political Corruption Abuse of office without profiting financially Trump commits crime in violating campaign finance laws to win election Personal Scandals Unethical personal behavior; adultery or harassment Trump sexually harasses and assaults multiple women International Scandals Violation of laws involving another nation Trump sides with foreign adversary over domestic intelligence services Financial Corruption Research Methodology This survey was designed on Qualtrics and utilized Mturk to reach 2,000 respondents. The survey itself consisted of a series of demographic questions, followed by several questions gauging both positive and negative partisanship, followed by a control and four treatment groups, and, finally, three outcome questions. Regression analysis was run with each of the three outcome questions: approval, feeling thermometer, and support for impeachment. Results Regressions run with each of the treatments individually, with the treatments pooled together, and with an interaction between the pooled treatments and a measure of true independents all returned no significant relationships. Marginal effects showed slight movement among true independents. Implications Looks like maybe he could shoot someone and not lose voters. Ineffective method of persuading voters to change opinions on him.