Was there an enthusiasm gap? Examining support for Donald Trump among evangelicals and nonevangelicals

IF 1.3 1区哲学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Politics and Religion Pub Date : 2024-06-05 DOI:10.1017/s1755048324000142

Alondra S. Pagán Márquez, Paul A. Djupe, Matthew Mettler, Jeffery J. Mondak

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Evangelicals arguably constitute an unexpected base of support for Donald Trump. One plausible account holds that evangelicals supported Trump reluctantly, backing him not because they strongly favored him, but rather because they viewed him as the least objectionable candidate. This perspective suggests a possible enthusiasm gap: among Donald Trump's supporters, nonevangelicals were more zealous while evangelicals were more tepid. We examine this account using data from March 2019, just past the midpoint of Trump's presidency, a period when any lack of enthusiasm with Trump among portions of his base should have been discernible. Our expansive analytical strategy, using OLS and matching, explores whether evangelicals offered Donald Trump more lukewarm support than did nonevangelicals, with support operationalized in six ways. Across 36 tests, no evidence of an enthusiasm gap between evangelicals and nonevangelicals is detected. Seen both in absolute terms and relative to nonevangelicals, evangelicals offered Donald Trump fervent support.

查看原文本刊更多论文

是否存在热情差距？考察福音派和非福音派人士对唐纳德-特朗普的支持情况

福音派可以说是唐纳德-特朗普意想不到的支持基础。一种似是而非的说法认为，福音派人士勉强支持特朗普，不是因为他们强烈支持他，而是因为他们认为他是最不讨人嫌的候选人。这种观点提出了可能存在的热情差距：在唐纳德-特朗普的支持者中，非福音派人士更加狂热，而福音派人士则更加冷淡。我们使用 2019 年 3 月的数据对这一说法进行了研究，当时刚刚过了特朗普总统任期的中点，而在这一时期，特朗普的部分支持者对特朗普缺乏热情的情况应该是显而易见的。我们采用 OLS 和匹配的扩展性分析策略，探讨了福音派是否比非福音派更冷淡地支持唐纳德-特朗普，支持的方式有六种。在 36 次测试中，没有发现任何证据表明福音派和非福音派之间存在热情差距。无论是从绝对值来看，还是相对于非福音派人士而言，福音派人士都对唐纳德-特朗普给予了狂热的支持。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Politics and Religion Multiple-

CiteScore

3.00

自引率

13.30%

发文量

审稿时长

8 weeks

期刊介绍： Politics and Religion is an international journal publishing high quality peer-reviewed research on the multifaceted relationship between religion and politics around the world. The scope of published work is intentionally broad and we invite innovative work from all methodological approaches in the major subfields of political science, including international relations, American politics, comparative politics, and political theory, that seeks to improve our understanding of religion’s role in some aspect of world politics. The Editors invite normative and empirical investigations of the public representation of religion, the religious and political institutions that shape religious presence in the public square, and the role of religion in shaping citizenship, broadly considered, as well as pieces that attempt to advance our methodological tools for examining religious influence in political life.