Trumping Politics as Usual

Author(s):  
Robert G. Boatright ◽  
Valerie Sperling

Who is tougher? In many elections, candidates frame their appeals in gendered ways—they compete, for instance, over who is more “masculine.” This is the case for male and female candidates alike. In the 2016 presidential election, however, the stark choice between the first major-party female candidate and a man who exhibited a persistent pattern of misogyny made the use of gender—ideas about femininity and masculinity—more prominent than ever before. This book explores the Trump and Clinton campaigns’ use of gender as a political weapon, and how the presidential race changed the ways in which House and Senate campaigns were waged in 2016. The thesis of this book is that Donald Trump’s candidacy radically altered the nature of the 2016 congressional campaigns in two ways. First, it changed the issues of contention in many of these races by making gender more central to the general election campaigns of both Democrats and Republicans. Second, expectations that Trump would lose the election influenced how candidates for lower office campaigned and how willing they were to connect their fortunes to those of their party’s nominee. The fact that Trump was expected to lose—and was expected to lose in large part because of his sexist and other bigoted comments—caused both major parties to direct more of their resources toward congressional races, and led many Republican candidates—especially women—to distance themselves from Trump.

Author(s):  
Robert G. Boatright ◽  
Valerie Sperling

This chapter provides the theoretical context for the study by exploring whether and how gender usually matters in campaigns and elections, and the ways in which the 2016 election was different in this regard. The chapter presents the literature on voter preferences for male and female candidates, the impact of gender stereotypes on voting, and the way campaigns and advertisers make use of these stereotypes when trying to promote their candidates or undermine their opponents. The chapter devotes particular attention to recent claims that women are not disadvantaged in contemporary American elections, and it explores ways in which this finding might be applied to the 2016 presidential election, the first to feature a female general election nominee.


2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (10) ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Warren ◽  
Mona Zanhour ◽  
Mark Washburn ◽  
Brianna Odom

Hostile and benevolent sexism continue to have adverse impacts on opportunities for advancement of women in organizations. In this study we examined the relationship between observer assessments and male interviewer sexism, emphasizing sexism's impact on perceptions of female candidates' hireability and competence. The sample included 266 male and female participants randomized as observers across interview scenarios. Scenario conditions varied between hostile, benevolent, and neutral interviewers, but the female candidate remained neutral. We found that benevolent sexism implies a positive outcome of enhanced observer perception of hireability with little stigma associated with the female candidate's competence, whereas hostile sexism had an overall negative effect, which was offset by observer impressions of likeability of the female job candidate who maintained a neutral composure. Our study findings suggest that observers' perceptions of sexism, benevolence, and a woman candidate's likeability differ and may change with experience. Perception of likeability, in particular, may provide a positive relational strategy for mitigating the effect of benevolent sexism without the tradeoff of perceived diminished competence.


2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 549-581
Author(s):  
Danielle Joesten Martin

When presented the choice between a male and female candidate, it is commonly assumed that women prefer a female candidate. But as more policy and ideologically diverse women run for office, this assumption may not hold true. Using an experimental design embedded in a nationally representative survey, I test how voters respond to female candidates with ideologies and abortion positions similar and contrary to their own preferences. I find that women, generally, prefer a female candidate, but support for a female candidate among women decreases significantly when she has a contrary ideology or policy position. Whether women prefer descriptive or substantive representation also is conditioned on individual-level characteristics. This study advances our understanding of voters’ responses to female candidates’ varying ideological and issue positions, which is increasingly important as more women run for office. Although women are more likely than men to give female candidates the benefit of the doubt, not just any female candidate will do—she needs to appeal to women on issue and ideological grounds too.


2021 ◽  
pp. 136843022199008
Author(s):  
Ethan Zell ◽  
Christopher A. Stockus ◽  
Michael J. Bernstein

This research examined how people explain major outcomes of political consequence (e.g., economic growth, rising inequality). We argue that people attribute positive outcomes more and negative outcomes less to their own political party than to an opposing party. We conducted two studies, one before the 2016 U.S. presidential election ( N = 244) and another before the 2020 election ( N = 249 registered voters), that examined attributions across a wide array of outcomes. As predicted, a robust partisan attribution bias emerged in both studies. Although the bias was largely equivalent among Democrats and Republicans, it was magnified among those with more extreme political ideology. Further, the bias predicted unique variance in voting intentions and significantly mediated the link between political ideology and voting. In sum, these data suggest that partisan allegiances systemically bias attributions in a group-favoring direction. We discuss implications of these findings for emerging research on political social cognition.


2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-142
Author(s):  
Alicia Kubas

Purpose Since the 2016 presidential election, hyper-partisanship has become a regular facet of the political landscape with Democrats and Republicans in increasing conflict. The purpose of this paper is to determine if perception of government sources related to trust and credibility has changed since the 2016 election and if the experiences and strategies of librarians who teach or consult about government information has changed in response to this environment. Design/methodology/approach A 24-question survey was distributed to garner qualitative and quantitative responses from librarians who teach or consult about government information in an academic environment. A total of 122 responses were used for analysis. Findings Academic librarians are seeing more concern from patrons about disappearing online government information and wider distrust of government information. Librarians also noticed that the political leanings of students color their perspective around government sources and that librarians also need to keep their political beliefs in check. Respondents emphasized a need for more government literacy and information literacy topics when discussing evaluation of government sources. Research limitations/implications The data collection only included responses from academic librarians. Further research could include in-depth interviews and look at experiences in various library types. Originality/value With the timeliness of this topic, there has not been an in-depth investigation into how the Trump administration has changed user trust and perception of government sources from the librarian’s point of view. This paper continues the conversation about how librarians can address the growing distrust of government information and give us insight into the effects of a turbulent political climate on government sources.


2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 15-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karin Liebhart ◽  
Petra Bernhardt

This article addresses the strategic use of Instagram in election campaigns for the office of the Austrian Federal President in 2016. Based on a comprehensive visual analysis of 504 Instagram posts from Green-backed but independent presidential candidate Alexander Van der Bellen, who resulted as winner after almost one year of campaigning, this contribution reconstructs key aspects of digital storytelling on Instagram. By identifying relevant image types central to the self-representation of the candidate, this article shows how a politician makes use of a digital platform in order to project and manage desired images. The salience of image types allows for the reconstruction of underlying visual strategies: (1) the highlighting of the candidate’s biography (<em>biographical strategy</em>), (2) the presentation of his campaign team (<em>team strategy</em>), and (3) the presentation of the candidate as a legitimate office holder (<em>incumbent strategy</em>). The article thus sheds light on visual aspects of digital storytelling as relevant factor of political communication.


Commonwealth ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua J. Weikert

The 2018 elections saw a record number of women running for elected office in the United States and in Pennsylvania, but whether this represents a temporary wave or a lasting trend is not clear. Using a combination of survey data; interviews of new candidates, elected officeholders, and party officials; and election data, this study examines the gender equality gains of 2018 in Pennsylvania’s legislature in historical and political context. The data provide evidence that formal recruitment of female candidates was common (but not universal), that the number of women running for and winning office increased by historic (and not just significant) levels, and that a persistent and consistent motivation was discernible in large portions of the candidate body. Survey measures of female candidate persistence—whether they plan to run again or recruit new candidates—also indicate that women intend to remain similarly active after the 2018 election cycle has come and gone.


2005 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chun-Sik Kim

This study examines the impact of political system and culture on political advertising of the United States, Japan and Korea. The population of this study was defined as all political ads appearing in major daily newspapers during the 1963–1997 presidential election campaigns in the U.S. and Korea, and the House of Representatives' election campaigns in Japan. A total of 695 political newspaper ads were content-analyzed in this study. Results of the study showed that there were differences in types, valences and appeals of political advertising of the U.S., Japan and Korea. Also, discussions based on study results showed mixed and intertwined arguments against or for the expectations for this study.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1532673X2110434
Author(s):  
Sung Eun Kim ◽  
Joonseok Yang

Gasoline prices are often a heated topic during presidential election campaigns in the United States. Yet, presidents have limited control over gasoline prices. Do voters reward or punish the president for changes in gasoline prices? Why might voters blame the president for an outcome beyond direct presidential control? This study addresses these questions by testing the effects of gasoline prices on pocketbook retrospection by voters. To capture the personal economic burden of gasoline prices, we rely on average driving times to work, given the inelastic nature of gasoline consumption for commuting. The results provide evidence for pocketbook voting: constituencies with longer average driving times to work are more likely to hold the president accountable for gasoline price increases. These findings have broader implications regarding electoral accountability and rationality in voting.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document