Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
ARTICLE
Pandering Politics?
Examining the Effect of Positive, Explicit Racial Appeals on Support
for Political Candidates
Leah Christiani
1
and Jeremiah W. Muhammad
2
1
Department of Political Science, Hunter College, CUNY, New York, NY, USA and
2
Department
of Political Science, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA
Corresponding author: Leah Christiani; Email: lc5734@hunter.cuny.edu
Abstract
In this study, we hypothesize that positive, explicit racial appeals to Black voters from White
politicians will be seen as pandering if not accompanied by an endorsement from a Black elite, which
would increase credibility of the appeal. To test this, we use a preregistered survey experiment with
approximately 400 Black Americans. Contrary to our expectations, we find that pro-Black appeals can
function to increase support for the politician, even without an endorsement. In the full sample, the
candidate enjoyed increased support when only using a positive appeal, when only receiving an
endorsement, and when making an appeal and receiving an endorsement—relative to the control
condition. Qualitative analyses of open-ended responses reveal that respondents saw the politician as
pandering in all conditions—an appeal was not necessary to evoke pandering. We conclude that
campaign strategies like appeals and endorsements can function to boost support even when the
candidate is perceived as pandering.
Keywords: Public Opinion; Black Politics; Racial Appeals; Endorsements; Voting
Introduction
During the 2016 presidential primary season, then-candidate Hillary Clinton appeared on
the popular morning radio show, the Breakfast Club, to discuss her candidacy, policy
positions, and to appeal to potential Black voters. An interesting turn happened near the
latter part of the interview when co-host Angela Yee asked Clinton, “What’s something
you always carry with you?”Pondering that question, Clinton answered, “Hot sauce.”This
appeared to be a reference to Beyonce’s 2016 record ‘Formation’thus prompting Char-
lemagne Tha God to say, “Now listen. I just want you to know people are going to see this
and say, ‘Okay, she pandering to Black people,”’ to which Clinton replied, seemingly in jest,
“Okay…Is it working?”Clinton quickly clarified that she carried hot sauce due to health
reasons, but the interview gained attention, hurting her standing with the Black commu-
nity. Throughout her campaign, Clinton was plagued with accusations that she was not
genuine and instead, only pandering for Black votes. What could she have done differently?
How can politicians combat perceptions of pandering?
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Hutchins Center for African and African American
Research. This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original
article is properly cited.
Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race (2025), 1–21
doi:10.1017/S1742058X25000013
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
Here, we seek to better understand if perceptions of political pandering among Black
voters can be mitigated by elite endorsements. We draw on the literatures on racial appeals,
Black political ideology, and trust to develop expectations that White politicians’attempts
to cater to the Black community may not be successful if they are not paired with an
endorsement from a credible source. Without alignment to a credible source like a Black
elite, Black voters will likely perceive the positive, explicit appeal as disingenuous pandering
rather than genuine commitment.
We test this expectation using an original preregistered experiment with approximately
400 Black Americans. We expose respondents to one of four news stories that cover the
supposed candidacy of a White politician for governor. The respondents either read about
(1) the candidate’s positive, explicit racial appeal to Black voters, (2) the endorsement the
candidate received from a Black elite, (3) both the candidate’s pro-Black appeal and
endorsement, or (4) coverage of the candidate without reference to race (the control).
We find, contrary to our expectations, that all conditions increase Black voters’positive
assessment of the politician, relative to the control—and that there is no difference among
the treatment conditions themselves. In other words, a positive racial appeal and an
endorsement both increase willingness to vote for the candidate and increase positive
evaluations of him (i.e., that is he authentic, trustworthy, would support people like them,
and that he stands with the Black community). There is no difference, though, between the
effect of a positive racial appeal and an endorsement on evaluations of the White politician.
To better understand this lack of difference, we go on to conduct a qualitative analysis of
the Black voters’written responses to the treatment. We find that the White candidate is
seen as pandering to the Black community in all conditions, including the control. This
sheds light on the null effects between the treatment conditions by clarifying that it was not
only the positive, explicit racial appeal that was seen as pandering—it was everything. A
White candidate attending a church in the context of running for office is inherently seen as
pandering. A positive racial appeal is not necessary to amplify that sentiment, and an
endorsement does not successfully mitigate it.
When it comes to heterogeneity within the Black electorate, we do find that Black voters
respond to positive, explicit appeals and endorsements differently based on their political
ideology and level of linked fate. Black conservatives support the White politician in all
conditions where a positive explicit racial appeal is present, but they withdraw support in
the endorsement-only condition. Somewhat similarly, Black respondents with low levels of
linked fate are most likely to trust the candidate when he makes a positive, explicit racial
appeal and least likely to trust him in the endorsement-only condition.
These findings add to our understanding of the ways that campaign strategies are
received by Black voters. While positive, explicit racial appeals and endorsements can both
function to increase support for a candidate, relative to an event that employs neither (the
control), they still may be seen as pandering. Below, we outline our broad theoretical
framework that shapes our expectations, describe the preregistered survey experiment,
present the findings, and conclude with directions for future research.
Racial Appeals
Racial appeals are a longstanding feature of American political campaigns. Racial appeals
are references to race that are intended to bring racial considerations to mind when
evaluating candidates or policies. These can be explicit, which are characterized by the
use of racial nouns (like “White,”“Black,”or “race”)orimplicit, which are meant to be
deniable, like coded language (e.g., “inner city”to cue “Black Americans”) (Mendelberg
2001).
2 Leah Christiani and Jeremiah W. Muhammad
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
Politicians engage both in negative racial appeals, disparaging a minoritized group to
appeal to hostile racial attitudes of (often, White) voters, and positive racial appeals, which
cater to a particular racial group with the intention of garnering support from that
community (McIlwain and Caliendo, 2011). While much of the literature has focused on
the way that White racism is mobilized through negative racial appeals (Christiani 2023;
Hutchings and Jardina, 2009; Hutchings et al., 2010; Mendelberg 2001,2008; Nteta et al.,
2016; Reny et al., 2020; Valentino et al., 2002), some have also considered the way that
politicians cater to minoritized communities through positive racial appeals as well (Burge
et al., 2020; Holman et al., 2015; McIlwain and Caliendo, 2011; Stout 2020; White 2007;
Zárate 2023; Zárate et al., 2024). Indeed, Christopher T. Stout (2020) argues, in the
increasingly racially diverse United States, politicians will need to make positive, explicit
racial appeals to garner votes from racially minoritized communities and White voters with
more egalitarian racial attitudes. The relevance of this question, then, amidst a diversifying
United States and increasingly polarizing racial attitudes (Engelhardt 2023) is paramount.
Here, we focus this study exclusively on positive, explicit racial appeals directed at Black
voters. Thus, we center our study on statements from politicians that use racial nouns
(making them explicit), but in a complimentary, positive manner. For example, politicians
are using positive, explicit racial appeals when they say that they “stand with the Black
community”or that “Black Lives Matter.”This is explicit because the politician is clearly
identifying race (by saying “Black”) and it is positive because they are characterizing the
group favorably.
Positive explicit racial appeals can be tricky, though, as they may be perceived as
disingenuous pandering for votes. Such a perception could lead to backlash among the
electorate. For the purpose of this study, backlash is defined as Black voters being less likely
to support a White candidate and/or seeing them as inauthentic. When the racial appeal
does not garner the expected positive effect, the backlash effect occurs, resulting in a net
negative for the candidate (Hersh and Schaffner, 2013). This kind of reaction is common.
The anecdote opening this manuscript illustrated an instance where Clinton’s attempt to
appeal to the Black community was seen as inauthentic, ultimately hurting her popularity.
Positive Explicit Racial Appeals or Pandering?
Recent work has explored when positive racial appeals are received as pandering. Camille
D. Burge and colleagues (2020) argue that “identity-based targeting that relies on stereo-
types to address and connect with Black voters will be viewed negatively as Blacks will
perceive these advertisements to be pandering to the Black community”(p. 426). They test
this proposition with a survey experiment, and they find that Black respondents reacted
most negatively to the campaign advertisement that targeted the Black community with rap
music. Using rap music to reach out to the Black community resulted in perceptions of
pandering and inauthenticity, and a decline in support (Burge et al., 2020).
Burge and colleagues (2020) point to the invocation of stereotypes as a primary
mechanism that results in perceptions of pandering. This makes sense, as stereotypes
homogenize an entire group and assign particular characteristics to that group (Bouchard
2022; Hainmueller and Hopkins, 2014; Peffley and Hurwitz, 2009; Pérez 2010; Stangor
et al., 2014). Unfortunately, White candidates have a long history of deploying racial
stereotypes. Often, they have evoked these stereotypes to mobilize White resentment
(Hutchings and Jardina, 2009; Mendelberg 2001; Valentino 1999; Valentino et al., 2002).
However, even when playing into those racial stereotypes is meant to appeal to the group, like
with the rap music experiment (Burge etal., 2020),they can often fall flat, withthe politician’s
caricatures making them appear disingenuous. Examples of these miscalculations abound.
Pandering Politics? 3
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
In 2020, then-presidential candidate Joe Biden collaborated with battle rappers, DNA and
Charlie Clips, to develop a Get Out the Vote battle rap PSA clearly targeted at Black
Americans in urban areas. Trying to look “cool,”engaging with rappers to mobilize Black
voters, as an elderly White man, fell flat.
However, it is not only the use of stereotyping that can transform a positive racial appeal
into pandering. Other factors matter as well. Marques G. Zárate (2023) argues that the
expectations for the group that the politician is a part of matter immensely for whether their
actions are seen as pandering. He argues that perceptions of pandering are tied to whether a
politician’s actions are surpassing or falling short of expectations that voters hold for their
group. When a politician is seen as making a significant investment into the community to
which they want to appeal, they can be seen as authentic rather than pandering (Zárate
et al., 2024).
Finally, shared racial identity (or a lack thereof) is often a strong cue for how authentic a
politician is perceived when they say that they share concerns of the group of voters to
which they are trying to appeal (Bobo and Gilliam, 1990; Colburn and Adler, 2001; Gay
2001; Philpot and Walton, 2007; Swain 1993). Michael C. Dawson’s(1994) canonical work
demonstrates that Black voters, in particular, have a sense of linked fate—that what happens
in their individual life is strongly tied to what happens to their racial group. Black
candidates, then, as opposed to White candidates, are likely to be seen as more authentic
in their appeals to the Black community. In particular, White candidates have a history of
reaching out to the Black community for votes, but then abandoning the group’s interest
once in office (Smith 1996). Thus, White candidates are likely to be seen as pandering when
reaching out to the Black community on the campaign trail—even, and perhaps especially,
when professing to support the Black community (McGraw et al., 2002).
Thus, recent work demonstrates that there are at least three key factors driving
perceptions of pandering: (1) the use of stereotypes, (2) pre-conceived expectations of
the politicians’identity group, and (3) racial identity. Racial appeals that rely on
stereotyping, confirm pre-conceived biases about the candidate’s identity group, and/or
come from a politician of a racial out-group aremorelikelytobeseenaspandering.
While racial appeals are highly contextual and there are multiple factors that matter,
these three characteristics have been identified as particularly meaningful in contem-
porary empirical work.
Defining Political Pandering
For this study, we draw on Zárate (2023) and Burge et al. (2020) to define political pandering
as a form of insincere or strategic communication in which a candidate or politician makes
superficial explicit appeals to a particular group to gain short term favor and electoral
support, without making a deeper commitment to the values or concerns of the targeted
group. Pandering may include one or more of the characteristics identified above: (1) use of
stereotypes, (2) failing to meet or exceed expectations, and (3) out-group racial identity.
Pandering differs from authentic appeals, which may be seen as rooted in concrete policy
proposals (Canes-Wrone et al., 2001; Jacobs and Shapiro, 2000) and/or coming from a
politician that has a longstanding, trusted relationship with the group.
Endorsements
One way that White politicians often try to increase their credibility among Black voters is
through the solicitation of endorsements from Black elites. Endorsements are when a
person or other source (e.g., civic organization, newspaper) indicates their support for
4 Leah Christiani and Jeremiah W. Muhammad
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
something or someone. Here, we are focused on endorsements of politicians by other elites
(e.g., community, religious, or civic leaders).
Endorsements are effective at garnering votes (Benjamin 2017a,b; Benjamin and Miller,
2019; Boudreau et al., 2019; Lucero and Robles, 2024) and can help voters make informed
decisions when they do not have full information about policy particulars (Grossman and
Helpman, 1999) or candidates. This is especially true in lower-information environments,
such as state and local elections or for ballot initiatives (Benjamin 2017b; Gerber and
Phillips, 2003; Krebs 1998; Lupia 1994). Ethnic group endorsements at the local level can
actually increase candidate support above and beyond ideological congruence (Boudreau
et al., 2019) and lead to support for policies that would benefit ethnic out-groups (Lucero
and Robles, 2024). This indicates the power that elite endorsements can have, especially at
the local level.
Endorsements are powerful because they act as a “signal or cue…that a particular
candidate will best represent their interests”(Benjamin and Miller, 2019, p. 644). Benjamin
(2017b) finds, through extensive experimental analyses, that Black Americans, in particular,
rely on endorsements when selecting candidates—to a greater degree than Latinx voters,
for example. Such endorsements can be particularly important for achieving cross-racial
coalition building, as they serve as a signal that a candidate, even if they do not share a racial
identity with the voter, is going to advance the voter’s group’s interests while in office
(Benjamin 2017b). While there can be backlash from voters when Black elites are seen as
too closely associated with the White community (i.e., seen as “selling out”or as “Uncle
Toms”), these accusations are largely remedied if the White candidate being endorsed is a
Democrat as opposed to a Republican (White and Laird, 2020).
Endorsements are so powerful for Black voters in part because Black Americans have
historically been a fairly united political force, with high levels of group consciousness
(Dawson 1994; Harris-Perry 2004; Tate 2004; White and Laird, 2020). This grows out of
Black Americans’reaction to racist exclusion and oppression by White Americans through-
out U.S. history. They have pushed back against this exclusion by building social move-
ments and schools of thought that oppose racial oppression (Browning et al., 1984; Dawson
2001; Gause 2022; Gillion 2013; McAdam 1999; Toure and Hamilton, 1967; White and
Laird, 2020). Indeed, the Black experience of living under racial oppression, particularly
one that resulted in racial segregation, led Black Americans to adopt high levels of group
unity (White and Laird, 2020).
While it is clear that this unity in struggle against racial oppression has resulted in high
levels of group consciousness, there are competing theories about why such a link has
emerged. Dawson’s(1994) theory of linked fate argues that Black Americans are united
because what is best for the (racial) group often translates to what is best for the individual.
In other words, Black Americans use the status of their racial group as an efficient way to
infer the status of their own individual prospects. Given the way that Black Americans have
been oppressed collectively throughout U.S. history, this heuristic functions well to
provide information about particular political choices, even when information is fairly
low (Dawson 1994). Other work has pointed to the role that social norms rooted in Black
liberation politics have played to create a unified (pro-Democratic) voting bloc (White
and Laird, 2020). In Ismail K. White and Chryl N. Laird’s(2020) account, it is not an
individual-level utility heuristic that produces this, but instead a group-level “social
constraint”(p. 15). In other words, group norms that are rooted in movements against
racial oppression have led to high levels of unity and enforcement of such unity. While
the precise way in which Black group unity has emerged is beyond the scope of this
manuscript, both of these processes get us to a place in which Black political unity leads to
increased levels of support for Black candidates and for the valuation placed on Black elite
endorsements.
Pandering Politics? 5
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
High levels of group cohesion has meant higher levels of trust among Black Americans
for Black politicians than for White politicians. Shayla C. Nunnally (2012)findsthat
Black voters even trust Black Republican politicians more than White Democratic poli-
ticians—despite the fact that Black voters, on average, tend to identify as Democrats
(White and Laird, 2020). She suggests that despite Black Republicans’outlying views
about Black group interest (Harris-Perry 2004), they still have a sense of racial identi-
fication that White Democrats cannot relate to (Nunnally 2012; Toure and Hamilton,
1967;Walton1985). Thus, even when Black voters do not share the same partisanship
with the Black politician, shared racial identity lends more confidence that the politician
will look out for the Black community. As a result, an endorsement from a Black elite may
be able to increase the credibility of a White politician’s positive, explicit racial appeal
(Benjamin 2017a). It may signal to Black voters that this politician’s appeal to their
community has more credibility, as it is aligned with an elite in whom they likely have
greater levels of trust.
Expectations
Bringing together the literatures on racial appeals, pandering, and endorsements, we
propose that when White politicians attempt to cater to the Black community, their
positive explicit racial appeal will not be successful unless they align themselves with a
credible source. Without alignment to that credible source, Black voters will likely perceive
the appeal as disingenuous pandering rather than genuine commitment (Dawson 1994;
Nunnally 2012). Black voters, through their racial socialization experiences, learn to
distrust White Americans the most, as they are the group that has historically perpetrated
the most discrimination against them (Nunnally 2012; Smith 1996). Thus, we expect that
endorsements from a Black elite will be more successful in garnering support than positive
explicit appeals—but that the combination of a positive explicit appeal and an endorsement
may lead to the greatest gains in support. This leads to the following preregistered
hypotheses
1
as it relates to a White politician:
1. A pro-Black explicit appeal combined with an endorsement from a Black elite will
lead to the most support among Black voters
2. A pro-Black appeal without an endorsement from a Black elite will lead to either no
effect or a backlash effect (decline in support) among Black voters
3. An endorsement from a Black elite without a pro-Black appeal will lead to an increase
in support (but the support will still be lower than if it were combined with a pro-
Black appeal) among Black voters
Despite the fact that a political legacy of uniting to resist racial oppression has led to
high levels of group cohesion when it comes to politics, Black Americans are not a
monolith. There are significant differences in Black Americans’politics, including their
self-identified political ideology (Jefferson 2020,2023; Philpot 2017)andtheinteraction
of multiple overlapping identities (Cohen 2009; Combahee River Collective 1977;
Crenshaw 1989; Harris-Perry 2011). Thus, it is unlikely that all Black voters will respond
to positive racial appeals or endorsements in the same manner. As a result, we included a
section in our preregistration where we noted that we planned to examine heterogeneous
treatment effects by individual-level characteristics. Below, we examine not only the
overall treatment effects, but also those moderated by linked fate, religiosity, partisan-
ship, ideology, age, and gender.
6 Leah Christiani and Jeremiah W. Muhammad
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
Data and Methods
To investigate these questions, we turned to an original, preregistered survey experiment of
Black Americans (N = 408). We fielded the survey on Lucid, an online survey aggregator
whose samples have been demonstrated to track well with U.S. national benchmarks and
suitable for experimental research (Coppock and McClellan, 2019).
Respondents first answered a series of pre-treatment items, composed of demographic
and ideological variables. In particular, respondents indicated their party identification,
political ideology, religiosity, ethnicity, and level of linked fate. We include these items pre-
treatment as we expect that they may condition the relationship between the treatment and
outcome variables. After respondents answered the pre-treatment items, they participated
in an attention check. Respondents were not dropped from the dataset due to failing the
attention check, as these checks have been demonstrated to track with politically relevant
characteristics (Berinsky et al., 2014).
Once respondents finished the attention checks, they were asked to “Please read the
following excerpt from a news article and let us know what you think.”The excerpt was
fictional, which they were debriefed about at the end of the survey. Respondents were
randomized into one of four conditions: (1) appeal only, (2) endorsement only, (3) appeal +
endorsement, or (4) control. The full text of the appeal and endorsement conditions are
reprinted in Figure 1. The combined appeal + endorsement is reprinted in Figure 2a and
the control is in Figure 2b. The text that was varied between the conditions is underlined in
these figures, but was not underlined in the survey for respondents. In each condition, a
White politician is appealing to a group of voters. In every condition except for the control,
these voters are clearly identified as Black members of a historically Black church. When
the politician is making the appeal directly, he speaks to the audience and vows to fight for
the Black community now and consistently into the future. When he is being endorsed, he
is a guest of the Reverend Floyd Brown Sr. In the endorsement condition, the White
politician does not speak at all. Then, in the appeal + endorsement condition, he is a guest of
the Reverend who also makes a direct, positive, explicit appeal to the Black community. We
chose to use the context of the Black church as it has long been a bedrock institution for
political mobilization and socialization within the Black community (Harris-Perry 2004;
Walton 1985).
Note that this study design does not distinguish between an authentic appeal and a
pandering appeal. Instead, we make the assumption that the positive, explicit, racial appeal
from the White politician will likely be seen as pandering (absent an endorsement). The
design here is to test whether an endorsement can mitigate perceptions of pandering. Based
on the literature we reviewed in this article, the racial appeal here fits three characteristics
that tend to result in perceptions of pandering. First, the politician is part of a racial out-
group, as he is White and the community is Black. Second, the politician is feeding into
perceptions that many hold about White politicians—that they are visiting and making
promises in exchange for votes. There is no mention in the article that he has a positive
track record with the Black community. Third, he is visiting a historically Black church,
which may be seen as stereotypical. In the qualitative analyses we conduct, we are able to
test the assumption that this appeal is seen as pandering by respondents—and we confirm
that it is. Still, while this appeal contains attributes of pandering, it was also designed such
that it was not so clearly disingenuous that there would be no possible redemption. Because
we want to test whether an endorsement can save a racial appeal from being seen as
pandering, we had to construct a racial appeal that was not too strongly pandering to allow
for this possibility.
Further, while the appeal + endorsement condition may seem heavy-handed, note that it
is not uncommon for politicians to use appeals in combination with endorsements when
Pandering Politics? 7
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
campaigning. For example, in 2020, then-candidate Joe Biden coupled his extensive policy
agenda for Black America (Eligon and Burch, 2020) with an endorsement from Congress-
man Jim Clyburn (Strauss 2020). With his positive appeals and elite endorsement, he was
able to revitalize his flailing campaign, win the South Carolina Democratic primary and
ultimately, the nomination. At the state-level, take former Illinois governor, Bruce Rauner,
as an example. He relied on appeals to the Black community, like noting his role at
Morehouse College (Geiger and Garcia, 2014) and endorsements from Black church
leaders (KSDK 2014) in the Chicago area to win the governorship in 2014. White
politicians looking for support among the Black electorate often rely on both racial appeals
and endorsements.
Figure 1. The Appeal and Endorsement Treatment Conditions
Note: The text above was not underlined in the experiment. They are only underlined here to indicate the
differences between the two treatment conditions.
8 Leah Christiani and Jeremiah W. Muhammad
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
As a final design note, we did not choose to identify partisanship of the candidate in the
experimental conditions. This is never an easy decision, as identifying partisanship can
carry assumptions but at the same time, not identifying partisanship can lead to respondents
guessing the partisan affiliation of the candidate (though note that our qualitative evidence
revealed a lack of consensus about the candidate’s presumed partisanship—we address this
further in the conclusion). However, our key aim was to test the effects of racial appeals and
Figure 2. The Appeal + Endorsement and Control Conditions
Note: The text above was not underlined in the experiment. They are only underlined here to indicate the
differences between the two treatment conditions.
Pandering Politics? 9
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
race-based endorsements. As we did not have a large enough sample size to vary partisan
affiliation and retain statistical power for the key tests we were interested in, we chose to
omit references to partisanship. We return to this discussion in the conclusion of this article
where we draw out the potential implications of omitting partisan cues.
After respondents read the excerpt from the news article, they were asked: “What is your
first impression of the candidate for governor, Mark Smith? Write 2–5 sentences describ-
ing what you think about him.”Providing a space for open-ended reflection after a
treatment can deepen treatment effects (Condon and Wichowsky, 2020) and the qualitative
data can provide an insight into how respondents received the treatment. Then, respon-
dents were exposed to several dependent variables. These variables ask that respondents
evaluate the candidate for governor on a variety of dimensions. Respondents were asked:
•Based on what you read, if he was running in your state, would you vote for Mark
Smith? (5-point scale)
•How authentic does the candidate for governor, Mark Smith, seem to be? (5-point
scale)
•How trustworthy does the candidate for governor, Mark Smith, seem to be? (5-point
scale)
•Do you think that the candidate for governor, Mark Smith, would support people like
you if he got into political office? (5-point scale)
•Based on what you read, we want to get your impression of the candidate for
governor, Mark Smith using a feeling thermometer. (100-point scale)
•Do you think that Smith stands with the black community? (4-point scale)
All of these variables are coded such that higher values indicate a more positive
evaluation. Using these dependent variables, we are able to estimate the way that the
White candidate’s interaction with the Black community affected respondents’attitudes
about him. Not only do we measure the extent to which the respondents would support the
candidate electorally, but we also try to tap elements of pandering by asking about the
extent to which the candidate seems genuine, authentic, and trustworthy. We also measure
whether they believe that this candidate would support people like them, and the broader
Black community, if elected to office. These varied measures allow us to capture a broad
picture of the respondents’evaluation of this candidate. After respondents answered these
items, they were debriefed about the true purpose of the survey.
Analyses and Findings
With these measures, we turn to evaluating whether the treatment affected respondents’
perception of the White candidate. Note that a manipulation check confirms that partic-
ipants understood and retained information regarding the treatments—and balance tests
indicate that randomization was successful. See the Appendix for details of these tests.
First, we evaluate the effect of each treatment on the dependent variables by specifying a
series of OLS models that use an indicator for treatment condition as the independent
variable. These results are presented in Table 1. By and large, the treatment conditions
tended to increase the respondents’evaluation of the candidate, relative to the control
condition. Respondents in any of the three treatment conditions were more likely to say
that they would vote for the candidate, that he was authentic, that he supports people like
them, and that he stands with the Black community. Respondents in the endorsement
condition were also more likely to say that he seems trustworthy—and respondents in the
appeal condition were more likely to rate him highly on the thermometer. These findings
10 Leah Christiani and Jeremiah W. Muhammad
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
demonstrate that making explicit appeals to the Black community and receiving endorse-
ments do increase the politician’s ratings relative to the control condition, but they do not
adjudicate between the tactics.
To evaluate which strategies are most effective at increasing ratings for the politician, we
respecify the OLS models, omitting the control condition. Now, the appeal condition is the
baseline and the other two treatments are compared to that condition. These models are
reported in Table 2.
Here, there are no statistically significant effects across the conditions. That is, there are
no differences in candidate ratings based on treatment condition when the treatment
conditions are compared to one another, rather than to the control. The appeal, endorse-
ment, and appeal + endorsement conditions all increased ratings for the candidate, but no
condition was more or less effective at this. This amounts to a lack of evidence for
hypothesis one, as we do not see a pro-Black appeal combined with an endorsement leading
to more support than either an appeal alone or endorsement alone. It also amounts to a lack
of evidence for the second hypothesis, as we do not see that a pro-Black appeal without an
endorsement elicits backlash. Finally, we do not have evidence for the third hypothesis
either, as the endorsement does not increase support to a lesser extent than when combined
with an appeal. On the whole, we do not find evidence that these strategies have differential
effects on the population, at least when it comes to the full sample.
Table 1. Average Treatment Effects for the Full Sample
Vote Authentic Trust Support Thermom. Stands
(Intercept) 3.10*** 3.29*** 3.32*** 3.13*** 57.70*** 2.70***
(0.11) (0.11) (0.11) (0.11) (2.63) (0.09)
Appeal 0.40** 0.39** 0.27* 0.49*** 9.54** 0.25**
(0.16) (0.16) (0.16) (0.16) (3.73) (0.12)
Endorsement 0.32** 0.42*** 0.29* 0.34** 4.65 0.29**
(0.16) (0.16) (0.16) (0.16) (3.69) (0.12)
Endorsement + Appeal 0.36** 0.38** 0.19 0.46*** 5.52 0.29**
(0.16) (0.16) (0.16) (0.16) (3.74) (0.12)
R2 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.02
Adj. R2 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.01
Num. obs. 408 408 408 408 404 408
***p < 0.01; **p < 0.05; *p < 0.1
Table 2. Average Treatment Effects for the Full Sample; Excluding the Control Condition
Vote Authentic Trust Support Thermom. Stands
(Intercept) 3.50*** 3.68*** 3.59*** 3.61*** 67.24*** 2.95***
(0.11) (0.11) (0.11) (0.11) (2.67) (0.09)
Endorsement –0.08 0.03 0.02 –0.15 –4.88 0.04
(0.16) (0.16) (0.16) (0.16) (3.74) (0.12)
Endorsement + Appeal –0.04 –0.01 –0.08 –0.02 –4.02 0.04
(0.16) (0.16) (0.16) (0.16) (3.79) (0.13)
R2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00
Adj. R2 –0.01 –0.01 –0.00 –0.00 –0.00 –0.01
Num. obs. 305 305 305 305 303 305
***p < 0.01; **p < 0.05; *p < 0.1
Pandering Politics? 11
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
To investigate this relationship further, we respecified OLS models with interaction
effects for variables that we believed may moderate the effect of the treatments on the
dependent variables. There were no statistically significant interaction effects between the
treatment conditions and age, gender, party identification, identification as a Christian, or
level of Christianity (identification as a Christian, plus the amount of church attendance).
There was not enough variation to explore whether ethnic identity influenced the treat-
ment (e.g., Black, African, African American, AfroLatino, etc.). However, there were
interaction effects for the two moderators: ideology and linked fate. Ideology interacted
with the treatment across four of the six models, while linked fate only interacted with the
treatment in one of the six models. Below, we present both sets of interactions and their
associated plots. First, Table 3 reports from the interaction between treatment condition
and linked fate.
There is only one statistically significant interaction across the six models, and thus, we
should take this finding with a grain of salt. Nevertheless, the third model demonstrates a
positive and statistically significant interaction between the endorsement + appeal condi-
tion and linked fate. To better visualize this relationship, we plot the predicted values of the
dependent variable, “trust,”in Figure 3. This demonstrates that for Black respondents with
high levels of linked fate, there is no discernible difference between the treatment condi-
tions. However, for respondents low in linked fate, the appeal alone condition leads to the
highest trust for the candidate, while the endorsement + appeal condition leads to the
lowest levels of trust. Perhaps Black respondents with low levels of linked fate are less
persuaded by endorsements as they do not feel as strongly tied to their racial group.
However, this would not explain why the endorsement alone condition fares better than
the endorsement + appeal condition. Nevertheless, the fact that the appeal alone condition
works best for Black respondents with low levels of linked fate is unexpected, as we
anticipated that the appeal alone condition may be seen as pandering and thus elicit
backlash.
Next, Table 4 present the results from a series of OLS regressions that interact the
treatment indicator with a measure of political ideology—with the control condition
omitted. Ideology interacts with the endorsement condition to predict the extent to which
Table 3. Linked Fate Moderates the Effects of the Treatment, for the Full Sample
Vote Authentic Trust Support Thermom. Stands
(Intercept) 3.61*** 3.23*** 3.44*** 3.38*** 66.91*** 2.90***
(0.52) (0.51) (0.51) (0.52) (12.40) (0.41)
Endorsement –1.04 –0.57 –0.52 –1.14* 0.20 –0.34
(0.69) (0.67) (0.68) (0.68) (16.41) (0.54)
Endorsement + Appeal –1.24 –0.71 –1.60** –1.23 –24.92 –0.66
(0.75) (0.73) (0.74) (0.75) (17.96) (0.59)
Linked Fate (LF) –0.03 0.13 0.05 0.07 0.10 0.01
(0.15) (0.15) (0.15) (0.15) (3.60) (0.12)
Endorsement * LF 0.29 0.18 0.16 0.30 –1.52 0.11
(0.20) (0.20) (0.20) (0.20) (4.77) (0.16)
Endorsement + Appeal * LF 0.35 0.20 0.44** 0.35 6.07 0.20
(0.22) (0.21) (0.21) (0.22) (5.16) (0.17)
R2 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.02 0.02
Adj. R2 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 –0.00 –0.00
Num. obs. 305 305 305 305 303 305
***p < 0.01; **p < 0.05; *p < 0.1
12 Leah Christiani and Jeremiah W. Muhammad
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
the respondent will vote for the candidate, believes he is authentic, and sees him as
trustworthy. The endorsement + appeal condition interacts with ideology to predict the
extent to which the respondent would vote for the candidate and the extent to which they
see the candidate as supporting people like them.
To visualize the relationship uncovered here, we plot the predicted values for each of
these dependent variables (vote, authentic, trust, and support) in Figure 4. As respondents
become more conservative, the endorsement condition (solid line) depresses their evaluations
of the candidate. The appeal condition (dotted line) does not have much of an effect; and the
endorsement + appeal condition (dashed line) has a slight positive effect on evaluations.
When we respecify the models with ideology as a factor variable, so that it not
constrained to a linear format, it becomes clear that it is strong conservatives who are driving
Figure 3. Linked Fate Moderates the Effect of the Treatment Conditions on Evaluations of the Candidate
Table 4. Ideology Moderates the Effects of the Treatment, for the Full Sample
Vote Authentic Trust Support Thermom. Stands
(Intercept) 3.83*** 3.70*** 3.70*** 4.03*** 66.85*** 3.04***
(0.26) (0.26) (0.26) (0.26) (6.42) (0.21)
Endorsement 0.48 0.55 0.59* 0.15 0.01 0.39
(0.35) (0.35) (0.35) (0.35) (8.59) (0.28)
Endorsement + Appeal –0.79** –0.41 –0.51 –0.67* –10.64 –0.25
(0.40) (0.40) (0.40) (0.40) (9.73) (0.32)
Ideology –0.10 –0.01 –0.03 –0.12* 0.12 –0.03
(0.07) (0.07) (0.07) (0.07) (1.74) (0.06)
Endorse. * Ideology –0.20** –0.17* –0.19* –0.11 –1.61 –0.12
(0.10) (0.10) (0.10) (0.10) (2.42) (0.08)
Endorse. + Appeal * Ideology 0.22** 0.11 0.12 0.19* 1.81 0.08
(0.10) (0.10) (0.11) (0.11) (2.56) (0.08)
R2 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.01 0.03
Adj. R2 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.04 –0.00 0.01
Num. obs. 305 305 305 305 303 305
***p < 0.01; **p < 0.05; *p < 0.1
Pandering Politics? 13
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
this relationship (these analyses are presented in the Appendix). That is, the treatments
have no differential effect on evaluations of the candidate among Black respondents who
identify as liberal—all of the treatments increase positive evaluations of the candidate,
relative to the control condition. Relative to each other, there is no difference. However,
for Black conservatives, the endorsement alone condition significantly decreases evaluations
of the candidate relative to the appeal only and appeal + endorsement conditions.
Before diving into the theoretical implications of this, keep in mind that the number of
strong conservatives in this sample is small (N = 16). Conservatives (N = 18) and slight
conservatives (N = 15) is similarly small. The vast majority of respondents identify as
moderate or middle of the road (N = 180). Compared to conservatives, larger numbers
identify as slightly liberal (N = 42), liberal (N = 68) or strongly liberal (N = 69). Thus, the
conclusions we draw from this analysis should be contextualized with the notion that this is
not a large group of respondents who is moving the needle in response to these treatments.
Nevertheless, one possible explanation is that Black conservatives may view the Black
pastor as a likely Democrat—and thus worry that his politics may not align with theirs.
Figure 4. Ideology Moderates the Effect of the Treatment Conditions on Evaluations of the Candidate
Note: higher values of ideology indicate greater conservatism.
14 Leah Christiani and Jeremiah W. Muhammad
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
Another possibility is that Black conservatives may view the Black elite in the endorsement-
only condition as “playing the race card,”a practice they find to be counterproductive and
detrimental (Dawson 2001). In contrast, the conditions with direct, explicit appeals may
signal greater authenticity and balanced messaging—especially because Dawson (2001)
argues that Black conservatives are not as bothered by racial appeals made by White
politicians and because conservatives tend to believe that White sensibilities on the issues
of race and economics should be considered (Dawson 2001). While these forces are
potentially at work, the low sample size urges caution in over-interpreting any of these
results.
On the whole, we find that the treatments largely increase evaluations of the candidate,
but only relative to the non-racial control condition. When we investigate whether there
are differences between the conditions—that is, differences between only making a pro-
Black appeal, only receiving an endorsement, or making a pro-Black appeal and receiving
an endorsement, we do not find statistically significant differences in the whole sample.
While there are some differences by ideology and linked fate in terms of how Black
Americans distinguished between the positive, explicit racial appeal and the elite endorse-
ment, these should be taken with caution as the sample size starts to dwindle with these
divisions. By and large, Black Americans do not show different levels of support for the
candidate based on whether he uses a positive appeal or an endorsement. Instead, they show
similar levels of support in all treatment conditions.
It’s All Pandering: Examining Qualitative Responses to the Treatment
To better understand why there was no overall difference in how Black Americans reacted
to the positive, explicit racial appeal and the endorsement from the Black elite, we turn to
the qualitative responses that they provided to the treatment they saw. After respondents
read the news article, they were asked: “Based on what you read…What is your first
impression of the candidate for governor, Mark Smith? Write 2–5 sentences describing
what you think about him.”Overall, 87.5% of respondents wrote an intelligible response to
this question that directly answered it in some way.
All of the responses were hand coded by the researcher.
2
To better understand how
Black Americans saw this politician, responses were coded for whether they identified that
the candidate was pandering to them or their community.
3
If the response said that the
candidate was just visiting for votes or that they were not genuine in their visit, then we
coded this response as pandering. Importantly, the response needed to indicate some
disingenuity in order to be coded as pandering—responses that were neutral or positive in
the description of the politician trying to get votes were not included.
We had initially expected that Black Americans would see the positive, explicit racial
appeal by a White politician as pandering, but that the presence of an endorsement from a
Black elite would mitigate this perception. However, when we examined the qualitative
responses, we see that the White politician was perceived as pandering across all experimental
conditions. Specifically, nearly 20% of the sample, across each treatment condition, per-
ceived the politician as pandering in a disingenuous manner—this is high given there was
no direct prompt to reflect on whether he was pandering, specifically. The mean propor-
tion of respondents who said that the politician was pandering was 0.20 in the control
condition, 0.20 in the appeal condition, 0.12 in the endorsement condition, and 0.23 in the
endorsement + appeal condition. According to an ANOVA analysis,
4
these differences
between the conditions are not statistically significant. Reading the qualitative responses, it
was clear that there were elements of all of these news stories that made it seen as though the
politician was pandering—specifically, that he chose to visit a church (which was perceived
as stereotypical), that he had no documented history or track record with the Black
Pandering Politics? 15
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
community (in line with negative expectations about his racial group), and his own racial
identity (White).
The respondents’own words illustrate these elements best. One respondent in the
control condition called out the stereotype directly, saying, “Mark Smith appears to be the
typical candidate the [sic] thinks showing up for Sunday service will give a broader appeal to
voters of color. Most candidates don’t realize that…seeking voters in church is outdated
and stereotypical.”Even though this respondent was in the control condition, they saw the
image of the politician so they knew he was White—and they picked up on the stereotypical
nature of attending Sunday service to appeal to Black voters, specifically. Another respon-
dent in the appeal condition noted that this White politician was living up to the negative
expectations that they have for this group, saying “I feel like he’s pandering and it’s making
me mad. These White politicians always come in and plead for the sake black votes saying
they’re going to xyz just to lie…” Finally, just like the previous quote, there was a lot of
mention of the candidate’s race. While one respondent in the endorsement condition
noted that it is possible for White politicians to be genuine, it depends on their track record,
writing, “All hype and no facts make me question this White candidate. I am not sure what
it means to ‘attempt’to push back racial and other divisions. Although there are many good
White elected officials, we need facts and a solid track record. I also want to know why this
church is backing him.”Another respondent (in the appeal + endorsement condition) called
out the performativity of the visit, saying “I don’t trust this because it’s a tactic almost
equivalent to kissing a black baby.”
This qualitative analysis helps explain the lack of difference across the quantitative
analyses of the treatment conditions: the politician was perceived as pandering in every
single condition. It is not just the appeal condition that is seen as pandering, as was
hypothesized, but instead, all conditions. This explains why there are no differences in
effects between the treatment conditions.
Discussion and Conclusion
The findings from this survey experiment indicate that positive, explicit racial appeals and
endorsements can increase support for a White politician among Black voters—contrary to
our expectations that racial appeals would only increase support when paired with an
endorsement. However, the qualitative findings provide a more illuminating picture.
Across all conditions, including the control, respondents in the sample perceived the
candidate to be engaged in pandering.
It was not only the positive, explicit racial appeal that was seen as pandering—it was
everything. Thus, because the politician was seen as pandering in all conditions, the
presence or absence of pandering did not significantly influence Black respondents’
evaluations of the candidate. Instead, the treatment conditions still managed to push some
respondents toward greater support for the candidate, demonstrating that perceived
insincerity by the candidate failed to entirely undermine the positive effects of the political
strategies of making appeals and receiving endorsements.
Interestingly, despite the breadth of research demonstrating the importance of
co-ethnic endorsements (Benjamin 2017a,b; Benjamin and Miller, 2019; Boudreau et al.,
2019; Lucero and Robles, 2024), the endorsement here did not perform better than the
positive racial appeal alone. This suggests that, in the eyes of respondents, the endorsement
from the Black elite did little to substantiate the candidate’s claims or intentions beyond
what the appeal itself accomplished. We think that a couple of factors could be driving this.
First, it could be because the elite was fictional and thus, is not a known, trusted figure for
respondents in this sample. An elite cue is more powerful when the cue-giver is known and
trusted (Boudreau 2020; Lupia and McCubbins, 1998). If the elite does not have credibility
16 Leah Christiani and Jeremiah W. Muhammad
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
with respondents, then they may be seen as someone focused on their own personal gain or
status, thus devaluing the endorsement (Dawson 2001; Toure and Hamilton, 1967). The
lack of an established identity for the pastor may have blunted the effect of the endorsement
treatment. In this experiment, we did not choose to use a known, influential figure, because
we did not want to complicate the design with respondents’preconceived attitudes toward
that individual. However, this may have contributed to the null effect for the endorsement
condition. Future work should build on this to examine whether the endorsement would
function to boost support, relative to the racial appeal, when coming from a known and
trusted individual.
Second, it could be that a pastor is not an elite who is best positioned to shape attitudes in
contemporary Black politics. The open-ended responses to the treatments indicated that
respondents saw the reliance on the Black church as stereotypical and, at times, outdated. In
our survey, 42.33% of respondents reported that they attend church infrequently (never,
less than once a year, once a year). This aligns with research suggesting that the Black
church’s influence on political mobilization has diminished due to the growing availability
of alternative avenues for social and political engagement among Black Americans
(Calhoun-Brown 1996) and that the United States is secularizing (Campbell et al., 2024;
Navarro-Rivera 2018; Voas and Chaves, 2016). Additionally, even frequent churchgoers
may not seek to merge their faith with their political behavior if they do not attend a
political church (Calhoun-Brown 1996; Harris-Perry 2004). Thus, it may be that a pastor
—or any religious figure—is not well situated to sway behavior or attitudes today.
Indeed, in contemporary politics, Democrats and Republicans attempt to win endorse-
ments from a broader range of institutions and elites, such as celebrities, community
organizers, influencers, and content creators (Goodwin et al., 2023; Jackson et al., 2024;
Knoll and Matthes, 2017; Nownes 2017; Pease and Brewer, 2008). While the Black church
has historically been a stalwart institution in the Black community, the decline in religi-
osity, especially among younger groups, is motivating a shift in strategy. From this, we see
an important direction for future research in exploring how endorsements from different
types of Black elites (e.g., religious leaders vis-à-vis secular community leaders, celebrities,
influencers, or activists) affect candidate support. These different endorsements may also
function differentially across the Black population—by age, religiosity, ideology, and more.
Understanding the impact of these various elites could offer valuable insights into how
political candidates should approach endorsements in an increasingly diverse Black com-
munity.
One aspect of contemporary politics that this article did not examine is the potential
influence of candidate partisanship. As mentioned in the data and methods section, we
chose not to identify candidate partisanship in order to preserve statistical power to test the
effects of a racial appeal, endorsement, and the combination. However, given the impor-
tance of partisanship, especially in something like a statewide gubernatorial race, future
work may consider how it interacts with both racial appeals and endorsements to shape
support among the Black community. In the qualitative analysis, very few respondents
organically mentioned partisanship in their response to the treatment. But of those who
did, they were split on whether the candidate was a Democrat or Republican (i.e., one
person said he was a Democrat, one said maybe a Republican, two said he was a Republican,
and one compared him to President Biden). Thus, there was no consistent perception on
the part of the respondents as to his likely partisanship.
Nevertheless, given the broad support for the Democratic Party that exists in the Black
electorate, as well as the social norms governing such allegiance (White and Laird, 2020),
varying partisanship would likely have strong effects on support. For example, it may be the
case that White Republican candidate would not have the same boost in support in
response to appeals or endorsements as White Democrats—at least among the majority
Pandering Politics? 17
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
of the Black population. However, it is also possible that Black voters could overlook
ideological congruence in favor of endorsements when in a lower-information or local
election (Boudreau 2020). Future work may examine the effects of partisanship at all levels
of the process to better understand the conditions under which appeals and endorsements
can boost support among the Black electorate.
This study provides evidence that positive, explicit racial appeals and endorsements can
increase support for a White politician among Black voters, even when such appeals are
perceived as pandering. However, there is more work to be done to understand how the
identity of the endorser and/or the particular format of the racial appeal shape perceptions
of pandering as well as political support. It is likely that when the appeal is not perceived as
pandering, it would fare even better. However, it is unclear whether a White politician can
make an appeal that is not seen as pandering, given the long history of such tactics in
U.S. politics and race relations. Future work may examine the specific nature of the appeal
and how it could work to garner or depress support, when attempting to engage in cross-racial
mobilization.
Supplementary material
The supplementary material for this article can be found at http://doi.org/10.1017/
S1742058X25000013.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Nathan J. Kelly, Jana Morgan, Shayla C. Nunnally, Christopher Ojeda, Justin
Rose, participants of the 2022 American Political Science Association’s annual meeting, and the
anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful feedback that greatly improved this project. We would also
like to thank the APSA Centennial Grant and University of Tennessee for their financial support in
funding this project.
Notes
1
See the Appendix for the preregistration.
2
See the Appendix for codebook and details.
3
Responseswere also coded for mentions of the appeal, endorsement, both, or neither for a manipulation check—
see the Appendix.
4
See the Appendix for this analysis.
References
Benjamin, Andrea (2017a). Coethnic Endorsements, Out-Group Candidate Preferences, and Perceptions in
Local Elections. Urban Affairs Review, 53(4): 631–657.
Benjamin, Andrea (2017b). Racial Coalition Building in Local Elections: Elite Cues and Cross-Ethnic Voting. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Benjamin, Andrea, and Alexis Miller (2019). Picking Winners: How Political Organizations Influence Local
Elections. Urban Affairs Review, 55(3): 643–674.
Berinsky, Adam J., Michele F. Margolis, and Michael W. Sances (2014). Separating the Shirkers From the
Workers?: Making Sure Respondents Pay Attention on Self-administered Surveys. American Journal of Political
Science, 58(3): 739–753.
Bobo, Lawrence, and Franklin D. Gilliam (1990). Race, Sociopolitical Participation, and Black Empowerment.
American Political Science Review, 84(2): 377–393.
Bouchard, Joanie (2022). Getting the Picture: Defining Race-Based Stereotypes in Politics. Frontiers in Political
Science. DOI:10.3389/fpos.2022.675338
Boudreau, Cheryl (2020). The Persuasion Effects of Political Endorsements. In Elizabeth Suhay, Bernard
Grofman, and Alexander H. Trechsel (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Electoral Persuasion, pp. 224–243.
Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Boudreau, Cheryl, Christopher S. Elmendorf, and Scott A. MacKenzie (2019). Racial or Spatial Voting?: The
Effects of Candidate Ethnicity and Ethnic Group Endorsements in Local Elections. American Journal of
Political Science, 63(1): 5–20.
18 Leah Christiani and Jeremiah W. Muhammad
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
Browning, Rufus P., Dale Rogers Marshall, and David H. Tabb (1984). Protest is Not Enough: Struggle of Blacks and
Hispanics for Equality in Urban Politics. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
Burge, Camille D., Julian J. Wamble, and Chryl N. Laird (2020). Missing the Mark?: An Exploration of Targeted
Campaign Advertising’s Effect on Black Political Engagement. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 8(2): 423–437.
Calhoun-Brown, Allison (1996). African American Churches and Political Mobilization: The Psychological
Impact of Organizational Resources. The Journal of Politics, 58(4): 935–953.
Campbell, David E., Geoffrey C. Layman, and Wayde Z. C. Marsh (2024). Will Americans Vote for an Atheist?
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 64(1): 19–37.
Canes-Wrone, Brandice, Michael C. Herron, and Kenneth W. Shotts (2001). Leadership and Pandering: A
Theory of Executive Policymaking. American Journal of Political Science, 45(3): 532–550.
Christiani, Leah (2023). When are Explicit Racial Appeals Accepted?: Examining the Role of Racial Status
Threat. Political Behavior, 45(1): 103–123.
Cohen, Cathy J. (2009). The Boundaries of Blackness: AIDS and the Breakdown of Black Politics. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Colburn, David R., and Jeffrey S. Adler (2001). African-American Mayors: Race, Politics, and the American City.
Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Combahee River Collective, The (1977). A Black Feminist Statement. https://careprogram.ucla.edu/education/
readings/Combahee1977 (accessed March 7, 2025).
Condon, Meghan, and Amber Wichowsky (2020). The Economic Other: Inequality in the American Political
Imagination. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Coppock, Alexander, and Oliver A. McClellan (2019). Validating the Demographic, Political, Psychological, and
Experimental Results Obtained from a New Source of Online Survey Respondents. Research & Politics, 6(1).
http://doi.org/10.1177/2053168018822174
Crenshaw, Kimberlé W. (1989). Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of
Antidiscrimination Doctrine. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1: 139–168.
Dawson, Michael C. (1994). Behind the Mule: Race and Class in African American Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Dawson, Michael C. (2001). Black Visions: The Roots of Contemporary African-American Political Ideologies. Chicago,
IL: University of Chicago Press.
Eligon, John, and Audra D. S. Burch (2020). Black Voters Helped Deliver Biden a Presidential Victory. Now
What? The New York Times, November 11, A1.
Engelhardt, Andrew M. (2023). Observational Equivalence in Explaining Attitude Change: Have White Racial
Attitudes Genuinely Changed? American Journal of Political Science, 67(2): 411–425.
Gause, LaGina (2022). The Advantage of Disadvantage. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Gay, Claudine (2001). The Effect of Black Congressional Representation on Political Participation. American
Political Science Review, 95(3): 589–602.
Geiger, Kim, and Monique Garcia (2014). Rauner, Quinn Take Governor Campaign to Pulpit. Chicago Tribune,
October 26.
Gerber, Elisabeth R., and Justin H. Phillips (2003). Development Ballot Measures, Interest Group Endorse-
ments, and the Political Geography of Growth Preferences. American Journal of Political Science, 47(4): 625–639.
Gillion, Daniel Q. (2013). The Political Power of Protest: Minority Activism and Shifts in Public Policy. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Goodwin, Anastasia, Katie Joseff, Martin J. Riedl, Josephine Lukito, and Samuel Woolley (2023). Political
Relational Influencers: The Mobilization of Social Media Influencers in the Political Arena. International
Journal of Communication, 17: 1613–1633.
Grossman, Gene M., and Elhanan Helpman (1999). Competing for Endorsements. American Economic Review,
89(3): 501–524.
Hainmueller, Jens, and Daniel J. Hopkins (2014). Public Attitudes Toward Immigration. Annual Review of Political
Science, 17(1): 225–249
Harris-Perry, Melissa (2004). Barbershops, Bibles, and BET: Everyday Talk and Black Political Thought. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press.
Harris-Perry, Melissa (2011). Sister Citizen: Shame, Stereotypes, and Black Women in America. New Haven, CT:
Yale University Press.
Hersh, Eitan D., and Brian F. Schaffner (2013). Targeted Campaign Appeals and the Value of Ambiguity. The
Journal of Politics, 75(2): 520–534.
Holman, Mirya R., Monica C. Schneider, and Kristin Pondel (2015). Gender Targeting in Political Advertise-
ments. Political Research Quarterly, 68(4): 816–829.
Pandering Politics? 19
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
Hutchings, Vincent L., and Ashley E. Jardina (2009). Experiments on Racial Priming in Political Campaigns.
Annual Review of Political Science, 12: 397–402.
Hutchings, Vincent L., Hanes Walton Jr, and Andrea Benjamin (2010). The Impact of Explicit Racial Cues on
Gender Differences in Support for Confederate Symbols and Partisanship. The Journal of Politics, 72(4):
1175–1188.
Jackson, David J., Anthony J. Nownes, and Thomas Norton (2024). Taylor Swift as a Potential Celebrity Political
Endorser. American Politics Research, 53(1): 48–54.
Jacobs, Lawrence R., and Robert Y. Shapiro (2000). Politicians Don’t Pander: Political Manipulation and the Loss of
Democratic Responsiveness. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Jefferson, Hakeem (2020). The Curious Case of Black Conservatives: Construct Validity and the 7-point Liberal-
Conservative Scale. http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3602209
Jefferson, Hakeem (2023). The Politics of Respectability and Black Americans’Punitive Attitudes. American
Political Science Review, 117(4): 1448–1464.
Knoll, Johannes, and Jörg Matthes (2017). The Effectiveness of Celebrity Endorsements: A Meta-Analysis.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45(1): 55–75.
Krebs, Timothy B. (1998). The Determinants of Candidates’Vote Share and the Advantages of Incumbency in
City Council Elections. American Journal of Political Science, 42(3): 921–935.
KSDK (2014). Rauner Gets Support from Black Chicago Pastors. September 22. https://www.ksdk.com/
article/news/local/illinois/rauner-gets-support-from-black-chicago-pastors/63-278820408 (accessed
March 11, 2025).
Lucero, Ellen, and Richard Robles (2024). Overcoming Resource Competition Among Co-Ethnics: Elites, Endorse-
ments, and Multiracial Support for Urban Distributive Policies. Political Research Quarterly, 77(3): 669–682.
Lupia, Arthur (1994). Shortcuts versus Encyclopedias: Information and Voting Behavior in California Insurance
Reform Elections. American Political Science Review, 88(1): 63–76.
Lupia, Arthur, and Mathew D. McCubbins (1998). The Democratic Dilemma: Can Citizens Learn What They Need to
Know? New York: Cambridge University Press.
McAdam, Doug (1999). Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, 1930-1970. Chicago, IL: Univer-
sity of Chicago Press.
McGraw, Kathleen M., Milton Lodge, and Jeffrey M. Jones (2002). The Pandering Politicians of Suspicious
Minds. The Journal of Politics, 64(2): 362–383.
McIlwain, Charlton, and Stephen M. Caliendo (2011). Race Appeal: How Candidates Invoke Race in U.S. Political
Campaigns. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Mendelberg, Tali (2001). The Race Card: Campaign Strategy, Implicit Messages, and the Norm of Equality. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press.
Mendelberg, Tali (2008). Racial Priming Revived. Perspectives on Politics, 6(1): 109–123.
Navarro-Rivera, Juhem (2018). Beyond Church and State: Liberalism, Race, and the Future of Secular Political
Engagement. In Anthony B. Pinn (Ed.), Humanism and the Challenge of Difference, pp. 191–214. Cham,
Switzerland: Palgave Macmillan.
Nownes, Anthony J. (2017). Celebrity Endorsements and Voter Emotions: Evidence From Two Experiments.
American Politics Research, 45(4): 648–672.
Nteta, Tatishe M., Rebecca Lisi, and Melinda R. Tarsi (2016). Rendering the Implicit Explicit: Political
Advertisements, Partisan Cues, Race, and White Public Opinion in the 2012 Presidential election. Politics,
Groups, and Identities, 4(1): 1–29.
Nunnally, Shayla C. (2012). Trust in Black America. New York: NYU Press.
Pease, Andrew, and Paul R. Brewer (2008). The Oprah Factor: The Effects of a Celebrity Endorsement in a
Presidential Primary Campaign. International Journal of Press/Politics, 13(4): 386–400.
Peffley, Mark, and Jon Hurwitz (2009). Racial Stereotyping and Political Attitudes: The View from Political
Science. In Eugene Borgida, Christopher M. Federico, and John Sullivan (Eds.), The Political Psychology of
Democratic Citizenship, pp. 247–274. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Pérez, Efrén O. (2010). Explicit Evidence on the Import of Implicit Attitudes: The IAT and Immigration Policy
Judgments. Political Behavior, 32(4): 517–545.
Philpot, Tasha S. (2017). Conservative but Not Republican. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Philpot, Tasha S., and Hanes Walton Jr (2007). One of Our Own: Black Female Candidates and the Voters who
Support Them. American Journal of Political Science, 51(1): 49–62.
Reny, Tyler T., Ali A. Valenzuela, and Loren Collingwood (2020). “No, You’re Playing the Race Card”: Testing
the Effects of Anti-Black, Anti-Latino, and Anti-Immigrant Appeals in the Post-Obama Era. Political Psychology,
41(2): 283–302.
20 Leah Christiani and Jeremiah W. Muhammad
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
Smith, Robert C. (1996). We Have No Leaders: African Americans in the Post-Civil Rights Era. Albany, NY: State
University of New York Press.
Stangor, Charles, Rajiv Jhangiani, and Hammond Terry (2014). Principles of Social Psychology. https://scholar.
archive.org/work/trferpb6ejgpxkmo7rhqxyfoly/access/wayback/https://opentextbc.ca/socialpsychology/open/
download?type=pdf (accessed March 11, 2025).
Stout, Christopher T. (2020). The Case for Identity Politics: Polarization, Demographic Change, and Racial Appeals.
Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia Press.
Strauss, Daniel (2020). ‘A Chain Reaction’: How One Endorsement Set Joe Biden’s Surge in Motion. The
Guardian. March 4. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/04/joe-biden-jim-clyburn-endorsement-
super-tuesday (accessed March 11, 2025).
Swain, Carol Miller (1993). Black Faces, Black Interests: The Representation of African Americans in Congress.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Tate, Katherine (2004). Black Faces in the Mirror: African Americans and their Representatives in the U.S. Congress.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Toure, Kwame, and Charles V. Hamilton (1967). Black Power: The Politics of Liberation in America. Vancouver,
WA: Vintage Books.
Valentino, Nicholas A. (1999). Crime News and the Priming of Racial Attitudes during Evaluations of the
President. Public Opinion Quarterly, 62(3): 293–320.
Valentino, Nicholas A., Vincent L. Hutchings, and Ismail K. White (2002). Cues that Matter: How Political Ads
Prime Racial Attitudes during Campaigns. American Political Science Review, 96(1): 75–90.
Voas, David, and Mark Chaves (2016). Is the United States a Counterexample to the Secularization Thesis?
American Journal of Sociology, 121(5): 1517–1556.
Walton, Hanes, Jr (1985). Invisible Politics: Black Political Behavior. Albany, NY: State University of New York
Press.
White, Ismail K., and Chryl Laird (2020). Steadfast Democrats: How Social Forces Shape Black Political Behavior.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
White, Ismail K. (2007). When Race Matters and When it Doesn’t: Racial Group Differences in Response to
Racial Cues. American Political Science Review, 101(2): 339–354.
Zárate, Marques G. (2023). Dimensions of Pandering Perceptions Among Hispanic Americans and Their Effect
on Political Trust. Political Communication, 40(4): 440–463.
Zárate, Marques G., Enrique Quezada-Llanes, and Angel D. Armenta (2024). Se Habla Español: Spanish
Language Appeals and Candidate Evaluations in the United States. American Political Science Review, 118(1):
363–379.
Leah Christiani is an associate professor of political science at Hunter College, CUNY in New York, NY. She
has written extensively on Whites’racial attitudes and manifestations of racism at both individual and structural
levels using experimental, survey, and observational data. Her work has been published in outlets such as Political
Behavior, the Journal of Race, Ethnicity, and Politics, and Politics, Groups, and Identities, among others. She received
her PhD in political science with a focus on American politics and political methodology from the University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill in 2020.
Jeremiah W. Muhammad is a PhD candidate in the University of Tennessee Department of Political Science
and a 2020-2021 American Political Science Association Diversity Fellowship Program Fellow. His research
interests include Black politics, political behavior, and public policy and administration. His dissertation asks,
“How do crises shape Black political participation in Georgia?”It develops the theory of crisis-driven mobili-
zation, examining how crises act as catalysts for mobilization that can either drive participation or reinforce
structural barriers. By analyzing voter behavior, engagement in protests, and institutional changes, it highlights
the role of overlapping crises in both expanding and constraining political access. He is currently a predoctoral
research fellow for the Freshwater Lab at the University of Illinois-Chicago, where faculty members, graduate
students, and undergraduate students collaborate to investigate and communicate Great Lakes water issues to the
general public, creating tools and research for visualizing current and future water scenarios.
Cite this article: Christiani, Leah, and Jeremiah W. Muhammad (2025). Pandering Politics?: Examining the
Effect of Positive, Explicit Racial Appeals on Support for Political Candidates Du Bois Review: Social Science
Research on Race, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013
Pandering Politics? 21
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X25000013 Published online by Cambridge University Press
