Replication Data for: Measuring Strategic Positioning in Congressional Elections

How does an incumbent's issue positioning respond to an extreme (moderate) primary challenger? While theoretical models of electoral competition suggest incumbents should adopt more extreme (moderate) positions, prior empirical work testing this hypothesis does not find support for this hypothesis. I argue existing measures of campaign positioning are not suited to adequately test this hypothesis. To overcome these data limitations, I introduce Website EmBedding (WEB) Strategic Positioning Scores. WEB Scores employ word embeddings with document-level vectors trained on congressional candidates' issue statements, as presented on their campaign websites. These estimates have high construct validity and improve upon current measurement limitations, including expanding the number of candidates with estimates and using actual issue-position data to produce these estimates. Consistent with theoretical expectations, I show incumbent candidates become more extreme (moderate) in their issue positioning during the campaign in response to an extreme (moderate) primary challenger whereas previous measures do not.