Skip to main content

Viewing the 2016 Presidential Campaign Through the Lens of Iowa Political Elites

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
From the Iowa Caucuses to the White House

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in US Elections ((PSUSE))

  • 136 Accesses

Abstract

In this chapter, I present a qualitative analysis of an original dataset collected through interviews of Iowa political elites and a survey of county party officials. After providing the reader with a description of the methods used to collect the data, I identify five major themes from the 2016 presidential campaign as viewed by Iowa’s state and local political elites, including: (1) the enthusiasm gap; (2) antipathy toward Hillary Clinton; (3) differences in campaign organization and elite support; (4) the significance of the rural–urban divide; and (5) 2016 being a “change” election.

Two guys were coming up … I forget which union they were a part of, they were leaving, and I walked up to them, I had to. I said, “I’m the chairman of the Republican Party” and they said, “We’re Democrats.” I said, “Well, first thing I’m going to tell you is welcome, you are more than welcome here.” I said, “I gotta ask you, … why are you here? I mean we’re glad you are here, but why are you here?” “He’s the only one that will say what’s on his mind.” I really think, even though that’s just two people, one day, and they cared enough about it to show up at this rally, I really think that was replayed and I think it crossed party lines, and I think it crossed ideological lines, and I think it tapped into that long time historic trend, and I think he had kind of a perfect storm going there.

Jeff Kaufmann, Chairman of the Republican Party of Iowa

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The survey questionnaire and interview schedule are available from the author upon request. Data collection for the survey of county party officials and interviews of state political elites was cleared by the Central College Institutional Research Board on November 13, 2018 (IRB #H-45-F2018-AG).

  2. 2.

    The reports are housed in a database by the Iowa Ethics & Campaign Disclosure Board: https://webapp.iecdb.iowa.gov/PublicView/?d=county.

  3. 3.

    The pre-survey letter and survey process began in mid-November to avoid overlap with the 2018 midterm election. If the survey had been distributed during the campaign, it was feared that county party officials may have ignored the invitation.

  4. 4.

    Geographic region boundaries were based upon the Iowa Department of Transportation’s 511 Social Media Sites (https://iowadot.gov/511/511-social-media-sites). The NE/NW overlapped counties were reallocated with Hamilton, Hancock, Winnebago, and Wright Counties in northwest Iowa and Butler, Floyd, Grundy, and Mitchell Counties in northeast Iowa.

  5. 5.

    In transcribing specific quotes from the interview recordings, filler phrases such as “ums,” “uhs,” “ands,” or “you know” have been filtered out.

  6. 6.

    This does not include staff from the Iowa Democratic Party who were working with the campaign to elect Clinton. Including coordinated campaign staff would increase the number to between 150 and 200 staffers in Iowa.

  7. 7.

    McGuire notes the lack of elite support was not due to an unwillingness to support Clinton, but an inability to be on the campaign trail during 2016. Boswell was defeated in 2012, no longer in Congress, and fighting cancer. Braley gave up his House seat in 2014 to run for the Senate and was defeated by Joni Ernst. After the election, he moved to Colorado. Neither Harkin nor Vilsack could undertake partisan advocacy during 2016. Harkin had retired from the Senate in 2014 and was working on his nonpartisan institute at Drake University in Des Moines. Vilsack was still serving in the Obama administration as the Secretary of Agriculture. This left Loebsack as the only federal elected official on the Democratic side.

  8. 8.

    Question 5 of the survey was recoded following the same process used to recode Question 3. Please see Sect. 2.3 for a detailed description.

  9. 9.

    There are theoretical reasons in the literature which explain why Obama voters could shift their votes to Trump in 2016 based upon racial bias. For example, see Sides et al. (2018).

  10. 10.

    Unfortunately, no measure of sexism is available in an individual-level dataset of 2016 Iowa voters. See note 1 in Chap. 4 for more information regarding why the role of sexism in explaining 2016 vote choice is not investigated further using survey data.

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew D. Green .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Green, A.D. (2020). Viewing the 2016 Presidential Campaign Through the Lens of Iowa Political Elites. In: From the Iowa Caucuses to the White House. Palgrave Studies in US Elections. Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22499-8_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics