Mobilization and Countermobilization: The Effect of Candidate Visits on Campaign Donations in the 2016 Presidential Election

Abstract

Political scientists studying the impact of campaign visits by presidential candidates have come to conflicting conclusions on whether campaigns change voter behavior in even small ways. In this article, we argue that, while scholars have generally interpreted campaign effect results as being unidirectional, the traditional metrics of such effects—polls and aggregate vote results—inherently reflect a net effect combining any potential mobilization of candidates’ supporters, offset by any countermobilization of their opponents. If such countermobilization occurs, weak or null findings in the campaign effects literature may understate or miss the true impact of campaign activities on voter behavior. To assess whether campaign visits produce mixed effects, we measure the extent to which visits by presidential and vice presidential candidates in the 2016 presidential election produced increases in campaign donations in the immediate aftermath of a visit. Our results show that visits by Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton inspired their supporters to donate more money than they otherwise would have. However, we also find a considerable level of countermobilization: visits by both Trump and Clinton resulted in an increase in donations to the opposing presidential campaign.