Who’s behind the Scenes? Examining Attitudes of Campaign Professionals

• In Event: Candidates and Campaigns in U.S. Politics

Abstract

The three key resources to political campaigns are time, talent, and treasure (Nimmo, 2000; Thurber, 2000). Time refers to the countdown to election day, talent refers to the campaign staff and volunteers assisting the candidate, and treasure refers to campaign finance. Of these, time is the most vital resource, as more funds can be raised and new staff can be hired, but election day does not move. In fact, most campaigns run a backwards calendar to election day, emphasizing the countdown. Candidates lean heavily on their consultants to determine how they allocate their time, and these decisions are key to the success of the campaign.

The 2020 Democratic primary race brought the conversation of campaign staff to the forefront in the media. Candidates like Julian Castro and Elizabeth Warren were celebrated for the diversity within their campaign staff (see Zhou 2019), while Kamala Harris’ campaign staffing decisions were critiqued as contributing to the demise of her presidential prospects (Martin, Herndon and Burns 2019). Despite all of the conversation in the popular press about campaign practitioners, it is striking how little the academic literature addresses campaign staff and the reommendations they make to candidates (see Dulio 2004; Nyhan and Montgomery, 2014; Pettracca, 1989).

While the academic literature addresses the impact of the campaign itself in persuading voters, it cannot be denied that the candidate-centered approach in political science leaves out the crucial role that campaign practitioners play in the process. A political campaign involves multiple players that can be pivotal for critical activities like raising funds and making sure that the candidate presents his or her best self to voters (Grossmann, 2009). Furthermore, there is some evidence that campaign practitioners have an impact on candidates’ electoral prospects (Medvic, 1998).

We argue that campaign professionals not only have an impact on campaign decision making, but also how the candidate is perceived by the public. We are particularly interested in how campaign professional shape the electoral prospects of women of color in comparison to their men and women counterparts. We use a survey experiment, administered to campaign practitioners, to understand how they think about strategic decisions as they relate to events that a candidate might attend. In particular, we vary district context and profiles of candidates to capture how a campaign professional might consider the tradeoffs in attending one event over another. While this might seem like a mundane choice, how and where a candidate shows up can be an important signal of priorities to the public, as well as helping to secure endorsements and cobbling together an electoral coalition. The results of this experiment provide important insights as to how women candidates of color may be disparately incentivized in how their campaign resources are allocated, and further reveal how consultants perceive and act upon the particular challenges and opportunities these candidates face.

Authors

• Jamil Shatema Scott, Georgetown University

• Todd L. Belt, George Washington University