Replication Data for: How Filibuster Rhetoric Informs Perceptions of Politicians

How does rhetoric about the filibuster inform people's views of political figures? We argue that support or opposition to eliminating the filibuster conveys information to citizens that they can use to assess a politician's ideological position. This information can also be used when citizens form affective evaluations of politicians, but its effects depend on people's partisan identities. We use a preregistered survey experiment - along with a secondary analysis of cross-sectional survey data - to show that a candidate who says that the filibuster should be eliminated is viewed as being more liberal than a candidate who says that it should be protected or who says nothing. We further show that Democrats like candidates who use elimination rhetoric more than protection or no rhetoric while Republicans react in the opposite way. These results suggest that elite messaging about salient political institutions can fundamentally shape people's views of political figures.有关阻挠议事（filibuster）的修辞论述，会如何影响民众对政治人物的看法？本研究认为，支持或反对废除阻挠议事，会向民众传递可用于评估政客意识形态立场的相关信息。此类信息亦可用于民众对政客形成情感评价，但其影响效果取决于民众自身的党派身份认同。本研究通过预注册调查实验，结合对横截面调查数据的二次分析，证实了如下结论：相较于主张维护阻挠议事或未就此表态的候选人，宣称应废除阻挠议事的候选人会被民众视为更偏向自由派。进一步研究发现，相较于使用维护阻挠议事的论述或未就此表态的候选人，民主党选民更青睐使用废除阻挠议事论述的候选人，而共和党选民的态度则恰好相反。上述研究结果表明，针对民众关注的核心政治制度的精英信息传递，会从根本上塑造民众对政治人物的看法。