Minority Candidates and the Electability Curse

• In Event: 50 Years of LGBTQ Scholarship at APSA Mini-Conference: Frontiers in LGBT Politics Research

Abstract

Discussions around electability are central in election campaigns, and often target women and minority candidates. This project examines three related questions: What shapes perceptions of electability? Why do electability concerns mostly affect minority candidates? And how can we contrast such concerns? To answer, I focus on LGBTQ+ candidates, a good test to examine electability given the relative scarcity of LGBTQ+ elected officials, the persisting prejudice against sexual minorities, and the lack of concentrated “natural” constituencies. I rely on three original datasets: the largest survey to date of LGBTQ+ candidates, which includes about 500 candidates who ran for office in the USA between 2018-2022; and two voter surveys, each conducted with a sample of about 2,000 American likely voters, where I embedded conjoint and priming experiments. I show that several factors fuel electability concerns among voters: first, the belief that the electorate will not support minority candidates because of prejudice; second, voters’ own prejudice, which spurs electability concerns as a way to provide a more acceptable justification to one’s opposition to minority candidates; third, the scarcity of past successful examples of minority candidates. I also explain that these concerns can be contrasted by correcting voters’ misperceptions, inasmuch as voters tend to overestimate the level of negative bias in the electorate. Providing accurate information on the level of societal support for minority rights and candidates successfully reduces electability concerns.

Author

• Gabriele Magni, Loyola Marymount University