The Values and Vices of a Veteran Voice

• In Event: Militaries and Democratic Process

Abstract

How do candidates employ their military identities in an election, and what are the effects of this campaign messaging? Despite concerns about the danger of a politicized military and regulations limiting military political participation, veterans are common in the U.S. political arena. During the 2018 congressional elections, over 150 candidates with a military background obtained major party nominations. This project seeks to explain the prominence of military candidates. I demonstrate (1) how valued identities, like military, can be used in distinct campaign messaging to improve public perceptions of candidates and (2) the specific danger these strategies pose to the military.

Military candidates operate in a unique position as former members of one of the most trusted institutions in the United States. I argue that they employ distinctive campaign styles related to their military identities. They refer to service experience in messages that advance national security expertise, highlight stereotypical military values, and mention typical partisan policies. However, the image benefits that candidates and parties obtain from appeals to military identity come with the cost of reputational damage to the military. In this project, I use case studies from the 2018 election to identify the predominant styles of military campaigning. Through an experiment modeled on rhetoric from the 2018 Congressional campaigns, I address how military campaign messaging affects voters’ judgment on a series of political outcomes, including vote choice, candidate and party image, and views of the military. In preliminary tests, I find that constituents view military candidates as more representative and more competent relative to their civilian counterparts, even in policy areas traditionally unassociated with service, like immigration. However, respondents also note lower trust in the military after viewing partisan military behavior. As new candidates with service use their military backgrounds to garner support on the campaign trail, these choices pose a potential threat to military apoliticism and the foundations of civil-military relations.

This project resolves part of the puzzle of why military candidates run for office by demonstrating the positive effect of military identity-based campaigning on public opinion of candidates. Moreover, the work confirms that the military is a unique and normatively important identity group in electoral politics. It also demonstrates the dangers of identity-centric political strategies that increase attention to military service in a political campaign.

Author

• Nicole Kliewer, Princeton University