All Together Now: Assessing the Effectiveness of Coordinated Campaigns

• In Event: Investigating the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election

Abstract

This paper examines the effectiveness of the “coordinated campaigns” between American political parties and their nominees in presidential elections using an original dataset on field office placement from the 2016, 2012, and 2008 elections. In recent elections, campaigns increasingly relied upon field offices to conduct voter contact activities such as canvassing, phone calls, and local get out the vote events, with positive effects on their candidate’s vote share in that region. These offices generally do not advocate only on behalf of the presidential candidates, however: they are often funded as a joint venture with a candidate’s party, with the expectation that the staff and volunteers in the office will get out the vote for down-ballot candidates as well. In 2016, for example, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton each partnered with their party for assistance with their voter contact operations. I assess the impact of a local field office on split-ticket voting and ballot roll-off (the act of leaving down-ballot contests blank while voting for more prominent races, and vice versa) in concurrent House, Senate, and Governor elections in 2016, 2012, and 2008. The data, volunteer, and staff infrastructure required to maintain a voter contact information means that campaigns benefit from relying upon their party’s infrastructure and the party benefits from the excitement and interest generated by presidential candidates. This study aims to illuminate the mutual benefits of this coordinated campaign, an institution that determines many of the face-to-face interactions with campaign staff and volunteers experienced by Americans during elections.

Author

• Joshua P. Darr, Louisiana State University