This article investigates whether accusing a political candidate of using racial appeals can be an effective counterstrategy. We contrast two theories: one predicts it deactivates racism in conservative whites, while our alternative suggests it persuades racial liberals.

Our research focuses on the 2016 presidential election and Donald Trump's campaign. Using experimental methods with varied politicians (by party and race), we test how framing an implicit appeal as racist affects voter perception.

Key Findings:

• Racial conservative whites did NOT reduce their support for Trump when called out.
• Instead, racial liberal whites evaluated Trump more negatively after the accusation.

This result holds even after accounting for factors like attentiveness, old-fashioned racism measures, and partisanship levels.

Method & Context:

We conducted experiments with multiple replications to confirm our findings.

The study's implications highlight how racial messaging can influence different voter segments based on their ideological stance.