This study examines how political parties’ rhetorical appeals to social groups affect voters’ party preferences. Parties regularly appeal to social groups in their political communications, often pairing these appeals with policy promises. Yet, existing models of voting behavior focus almost exclusively on the role of policies. I use a pre-registered conjoint experiment fielded on a nationally representative sample of British adults in August 2024 that has voters consider parties’ promises to social groups in four different issue areas: Health, Housing, Environment, and the Economy. Across all issues, I find no evidence that parties gain support from using group appeals. Rather, voters punish parties who explicitly appeal to groups they do not belong to, do not like, or do not consider important. Appeals to women, therefore, tend to get punished, whereas appeals to workers have a more neutral effect on party favorability. I also find that the detected backlash is not driven by out-group members, but by those who do not consider the group important. These findings shed light on the role of group attitudes, beyond just identity, in explaining vote choice and advance our understanding of the consequences of group appeals.