Study Challenges Conventional Wisdom: Anti-Immigration Rhetoric Might Not Be a Winning Strategy

NEW YORK CITY - Anti-immigrant rhetoric has not been a winning campaign platform, despite what the current political conversation might suggest, a new study by the Center for Latin American & Latino Studies at the American University said.

In the study, researchers looked at competitive gubernatorial and congressional elections across the United States in 2018, 2020, 2022, and 2023. They found that anti-immigrant rhetoric often proved to be a common denominator across the races lost and throughout the election cycles looked at, according to the study.

"Anti-immigration sentiment and rhetoric have permeated campaigns and political landscapes in the U.S. and abroad," the study by the American University read. "Since 2020, we have seen a trend of voter preferences 'for increased immigration' emerge, exemplifying a trend of voter perspectives on the issue."

In the 2018 election cycle, twenty candidates in competitive elections employed harsh rhetoric regarding unauthorized immigration and border security— and ultimately lost.

During this year, losing candidates included references to the threat of unauthorized immigrants and the "caravan" encroaching upon the U.S.-Mexico border. Another message commonly seen was the necessity for "secure borders" through border militarization and the building of a border wall.

In the 2020 election cycle, the use of such messages was less seen, something that greatly favored Republican candidates. Still, ten candidates were found to have employed anti-immigrant rhetoric and ended up losing. Under this trend also falls the unsuccessful re-election bid by former President Trump.

In that presidential election year, a similar message, but it was more characterized by the popularization of the term "illegal aliens" and an implied presence in the U.S. by this group as a threat in terms of increasing criminal activity and committing an "invasion of the U.S."

The trend then continued in 2022, when gubernatorial and congressional elections failed to capture voters with anti-immigrant campaigns, unlike what strategists expected, the study explains.

Interestingly however, during 2022 a shifting political landscape was seen as growing claims that today's immigration population is taking advantage of "overgenerous" U.S. immigration politics promulgated by left-wing political leaders also grew during Biden's first two years in office.

In 2022, seventeen candidates were found to have employed anti-immigrant campaign rhetoric in total, with five candidates securing an electoral victory. Among them was the now-disgraced Congressman George Santos, from New York-3 Congressional district. His seat is now occupied by Democrat Tom Suozzi.

In 2023, while immigration remained a topic across several campaign trails during this special election cycle, the degree to which immigration was mentioned declined.

Now, as the presidential election approaches in November, it is unclear how the immigration issue will play out, as the past year has seen an increase in salience and polarization regarding this issue.

On one hand, former President Donald Trump, the presumptive GOP nominee, has ramped up his anti-immigration campaign during rallies, often calling immigrants "animals" and "not human," as well as blaming them of "poisoning the blood" of America. He also recently lamented that migrants are coming from countries in Latin America, Asia and Africa, rather than "nice" countries like Denmark, Switzerland and Norway.

On the other hand, President Biden has also opted for harsher immigration policies, though he has not yet resorted to dehumanizing immigrants. Earlier this year, he supported the now-dead border bill, which would have increased funding and technology in the southern border to attempt to decrease illegal crossings.

Among the electorate, immigration has also highly increased in salience, several studies and reports show. The shift in analysis is particularly pronounced among independent and Republican voters, signaling a growing apprehension about the consequences of illegal border crossings and Washington's perceived failure to address the issue effectively, according to The Wall Street Journal.

But regardless of growing tensions, the analysis by the American University argues for a more tolerant, less aggressive approach to this issue.

"Though, anti-immigrant campaigns can alienate independent, progressive, Asian, and Latino voters," the study reads. "As the analyses shown here show, having a more humane, measured, and pragmatic view of immigrants can indeed be the morally and politically right thing to do."