*2020 ELECTION SNAPSHOT*
ANALYSIS: The Role of Immigration in the 2020 Election Cycle
Throughout the 2020 election cycle, The Immigration Hub undertook an intensive, comprehensive effort to monitor and track how immigration as an issue played out during the election cycle, in real-time. Following a deep examination and analysis of the tracking data – including campaign spending, advertising, voter polling, media mentions, and voter modeling – Immigration Hub has compiled the below eight top takeaways to provide a snapshot of the role immigration played in the 2020 election.
EIGHT TOP TAKEAWAYS: How Immigration Fared in the 2020 Election
While immigration didn’t dominate Trump’s Twitter feed, the issue was still at the heart of his messaging strategy, blended with his “law and order” message.
The Trump campaign prioritized the issue in spending and tweaked their messaging strategy, incorporating immigration into their fear-based messaging to scare swing voters against the “radical left”.
From September 1 - October 15, the Trump campaign spent $9 million deploying anti-immigration ads on television, second only to ads on the issue of China.
According to tracking by the Hub, ads with anti-immigrant rhetoric made up 20% of the $7 million worth of attack ads against Biden between September 26 and October 17.
Republicans also deployed a direct mail strategy – which weaponized amnesty as “evidence” of Biden’s embrace of the “radical left.”
Other expenditures include a $10 million-plus YouTube campaign featuring Trump’s “Radical, Extreme, Left” ad that connects tax increases with undocumented immigrants.
Voters at large disapproved of Trump’s divisiveness, which included his approach to immigration.
57% of Michigan voters in the Detroit suburbs and 67% of Pennsylvania voters in the Philadelphia suburbs found Trump’s divisiveness was the most concerning personal trait of the president while over 40% of all voters surveyed in Michigan and Pennsylvania said Trump’s position on immigration was more of a reason to vote against him.
Trump’s disparagement of immigrants and immigration policies was considered by voters to be key contributors to his division.
According to the Hub’s post-election survey of Michigan voters, Trump’s divisive approach to the presidency was a key reason why he lost the election and his approach to immigration contributed to perceptions of Trump as “divider-in-chief”.
Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric failed to serve as a wedge issue and turned off swing voters.
Three major battleground state polls, one Michigan poll on the presidential and Senate races, two post-election surveys of Michigan and Pennsylvania voters, and ad testing further demonstrated growing support for pro-immigration policies and candidates, including President-Elect Joe Biden.
Overall, Trump saw diminished margins across Michigan, even in Republican suburbs such as Milford and Commerce townships. Other reliably Republican counties where Trump’s vote margin diminished from 2016 were Ottawa, Livingston, Midland, and Emmet.
Pennsylvania’s swing back to blue this year was completed with Biden’s wins in two of the three counties that voted for President Obama in 2012 and Trump in 2016: Erie and Northampton, and ran 5.3 points better than Hillary Clinton in the third, Luzerne, according to the Immigration Hub’s analysis.
Voters in battleground states moved further away from Trump and Republicans on immigration than ever before.
Post-election polling of Pennsylvania and Michigan voters found that Trump’s anti-immigration policies were a net negative – more voters (41%) considered his immigration agenda to be a reason to vote against him than those who found those (34%) policies to be a reason to vote for him.
50% of voters who voted for Trump in 2016 but switched to Biden in 2020 cited Trump’s immigration policies as more of a reason to vote against him.
Trump and GOP anti-immigrant rhetoric became a political liability for Republicans down-ballot.
A poll of 623 registered Michigan voters, conducted by Change Research, in the last week before Election Day found that attempts to attack Sen. Gary Peters on so-called sanctuary cities were ineffective, only one in five voters – and fewer than half of Republicans – found it to be a reason to vote against him.
Rep. Matt Cartwright (PA-08) was subjected this year to hyperbolic attacks regarding immigration by Republican candidate Jim Bognet, whose first ad accused Cartwright of supporting “illegal” immigrants taking American jobs. Later ads attacked Cartwright for voting in favor of the Dream and Promise Act. Cartwright scored a solid victory against Bognet for a 5th term in the House.
Ignoring the lessons of 2018, GOP candidate Sean Parnell failed to galvanize voters by echoing the president’s “radical left” and “law and order” messaging. Congressman Conor Lamb (PA-17), a supporter of Dreamers and immigration reform, once again swung voters in a district Trump had won in 2016.
Republican candidate Lisa Scheller endorsed the president’s border wall and “amnesty” attacks, employing them against Congresswoman Susan Wild (PA-07). Scheller paid no heed to Pennsylvania suburban voters who have largely supported pro-immigration policies and disapproved of Trump’s vanity wall and family separation policy and voters reelected Rep. Wild.
Against a backdrop of dwindling support among female suburban voters, Trump’s divisiveness, attempted termination of DACA, and family separation policies served as the trifecta that voters in the suburbs overwhelmingly rejected.
Dwindling support for Trump among suburban voters, particularly women, started early despite his attempts to scare the suburban electorate with attacks on refugees and immigrants. The trend continued, increasing Joe Biden’s margin of victory. Key suburbs in Michigan, especially surrounding Detroit, came in strong for the vice president and Senator Gary Peters – both of whom were consistently attacked on “amnesty” and “sanctuary cities”.
Biden won 68% of urban voters to 31% for Trump and 54% of suburban voters to 44% for Trump. For white female college graduates, the Democratic advantage grew from 6% in 2016 to 20% in 2020.
Notably, Biden won Kalamazoo County in Michigan, the home of Republican Rep. Fred Upton, with 58.4% of the vote, while Trump received only 39.6%. Upton supports some pro-immigrant proposals like relief for “Dreamers,” and voted in 2019 to condemn Trump’s tweets that urged four Democratic congresswomen of color to return to their countries, including Detroit-born Rep. Rashida Tlaib.
Overall, Trump saw diminished margins across Michigan, even in Republican suburbs such as Milford and Commerce townships. Other reliably Republican counties where Trump’s vote margin diminished from 2016 were the counties of Ottawa, Livingston County, Midland, and Emmet.
The issue of immigration played an important role in persuading voters.
Research and voter outreach programs by the Immigration Hub and other pro-immigrant organizations demonstrated that critical blocs of voters in battleground states can be persuaded to support Democratic candidates with values-based, pro-immigration messages.
By establishing a voter model, in collaboration with Civis Analytics, the Hub was able to identify nearly 6 million swing voters in PA, MI, CO, and WI who moved away from President Trump and toward Democrats on vote choice when targeted with values-based immigration messaging.
Three major battleground state polls, one Michigan poll on the presidential and Senate races, two post-election surveys of Michigan and Pennsylvania voters, and ad testing further demonstrated growing support for pro-immigration policies and candidates, including President-Elect Joe Biden.
In a randomized controlled test, conducted by BlueLabs and the Immigration Hub, of voters in Michigan and Pennsylvania before and after being exposed to the Hub’s pro-immigrant content found an increase in swing voters reporting immigration reform as a top priority or an important issue for the next president to address, among other findings.
President-Elect Biden’s vision for immigration is in line with voter’s strong support for key immigration reforms.
Support for DACA continues to be at an all-time high. Over 62% of battleground voters, including 65% in Florida, support the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program for “Dreamers”.
Over 60% of voters oppose jailing families who have committed no crimes and are seeking asylum; and over 57% of voters oppose the practice of detention and family separation at the U.S.-Mexico border.
Over 55% of voters surveyed, including a majority of Independents and 60% of Pennsylvania voters, agree citizenship for undocumented immigrant workers should be part of America’s recovery, and prefer citizenship for America’s undocumented immigrants over deportation.
Gains in the Philadelphia collar counties helped drive Biden’s statewide lead, but he also improved on Hilary Clinton’s performance in 19 counties around the state and cut Trump’s margins even in counties he lost.
Biden improved on Hilary Clinton’s performance among Pennsylvania voters in urban, rural, and suburban areas. He was +6 over Clinton in cities, +5 in the suburbs, and +12 in rural areas. Biden also improved over Clinton by 5 points with college-educated white women and by 15 points with college-educated white men.
###
The Immigration Hub is a national organization dedicated to advancing fair and just immigration policies through strategic leadership, innovative communications strategies, legislative advocacy and collaborative partnerships.