Exploring Charismatic Leadership: A Comparative Analysis of the Rhetoric of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in the 2016 Presidential Election

2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noor Ghazal Aswad
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Charismatic Leadership ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Donald Trump

scholarly journals Don’t Republicans Tweet Too? Using Twitter to Assess the Consequences of Political Endorsements by Celebrities

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 144-160
Author(s):  
Jan Zilinsky ◽  
Cristian Vaccari ◽  
Jonathan Nagler ◽  
Joshua A. Tucker
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Presidential Candidate ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Presidential Candidates ◽  
Political Preferences ◽  
The Social ◽  
Decision To Stay ◽  
Presidential Election Campaign

Michael Jordan supposedly justified his decision to stay out of politics by noting that Republicans buy sneakers too. In the social media era, the name of the game for celebrities is engagement with fans. So why then do celebrities risk talking about politics on social media, which is likely to antagonize a portion of their fan base? With this question in mind, we analyze approximately 220,000 tweets from 83 celebrities who chose to endorse a presidential candidate in the 2016 U.S. presidential election campaign to assess whether there is a cost—defined in terms of engagement on Twitter—for celebrities who discuss presidential candidates. We also examine whether celebrities behave similarly to other campaign surrogates in being more likely to take on the “attack dog” role by going negative more often than going positive. More specifically, we document how often celebrities of distinct political preferences tweet about Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders, and Hillary Clinton, and we show that followers of opinionated celebrities do not withhold engagement when entertainers become politically mobilized and do indeed often go negative. Interestingly, in some cases political content from celebrities actually turns out to be more popular than typical lifestyle tweets.

Losing (to) Misogynists

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Manne
Keyword(s):  
Social Psychology ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Male Counterpart ◽  
Left Wing ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Leadership Positions ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Protective Mechanisms ◽  
The Right

This final chapter applies the analysis of misogyny to the 2016 presidential election, in which Hillary Clinton was defeated by Donald Trump, despite the latter being vastly underqualified and temperamentally and morally unsuited to the position. There was also a great deal of misogyny directed toward Clinton not only by Trump and others on the right but also from left-wing sources. It is argued that much of this misogyny and even the outcome were to some extent predictable, on the basis of evidence of misogynistic biases against women who compete for male-dominated leadership positions. Research in social psychology shows that, when a woman cannot be judged less competent than her male counterpart in such contexts, many people will hold that, although they are equally competent, she is less likable than he is. Women are just as likely as men to reject high-achieving women in this manner, due to ego-protective mechanisms.

scholarly journals Micro-Expressions of Fear During the 2016 Presidential Campaign Trail: Their Influence on Trait Perceptions of Donald Trump

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick A. Stewart ◽  
Elena Svetieva
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
Presidential Campaign ◽  
Contrast Study ◽  
Leadership Traits ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
National Convention ◽  
Acceptance Speech

The 2016 United States presidential election was exceptional for many reasons; most notably the extreme division between supporters of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. In an election that turned more upon the character traits of the candidates than their policy positions, there is reason to believe that the non-verbal performances of the candidates influenced attitudes toward the candidates. Two studies, before Election Day, experimentally tested the influence of Trump’s micro-expressions of fear during his Republican National Convention nomination acceptance speech on how viewers evaluated his key leadership traits of competence and trustworthiness. Results from Study 1, conducted 3 weeks prior to the election, indicated generally positive effects of Trump’s fear micro-expressions on his trait evaluations, particularly when viewers were first exposed to his opponent, Clinton. In contrast, Study 2, conducted 4 days before Election Day, suggests participants had at that point largely established their trait perceptions and were unaffected by the micro-expressions.

Behavior notwithstanding: Person perception and news photographs of the two leading candidates in the 2016 presidential election

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 146-159
Author(s):  
Nicole Smith Dahmen
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Person Perception ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Election Study ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Quantitative Content Analysis ◽  
Quantitative Content ◽  
2016 Election ◽  
Perception Theory

Applying person perception theory, this research uses quantitative content analysis to analyze 1,183 newspaper photographs of the two leading candidates from the 2016 presidential election. Study findings show that there were statistically significant differences in the photographic presentations of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in the 2016 election, with Clinton pictured more favorably than Trump.

scholarly journals Social Media for Political Campaigns: An Examination of Trump’s and Clinton’s Frame Building and Its Effect on Audience Engagement

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 205630511985514 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdulsamad Sahly ◽  
Chun Shao ◽  
K. Hazel Kwon
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Political Ideology ◽  
Political Campaigns ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Audience Engagement ◽  
Frame Effect ◽  
Frame Building ◽  
Cross Platform

This study investigates cross-platform differences in social media by analyzing the contending candidates who represent different political ideology during the 2016 presidential election. Borrowing the frame-building and frame-effect perspectives, it examines the ways in which the two contending candidates (Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton) built their message frames in two different social platforms—Twitter ( N = 3,805) and Facebook ( N = 655)—and how the frame differences affected audience engagement in each platform. The results showed that Trump’s messages presented more variety in frame selection than Clinton’s, focusing on conflict and negative emotional frames on Twitter while displaying frequent positive emotional frames on Facebook. Clinton’s strategy relied heavily on conflict and positive emotional frames on both Twitter and Facebook. The results also suggested that for both Trump and Clinton followers on Twitter, conflict and morality frames consistently attracted retweeting behaviors and emotional frames attracted favoriting behaviors. However, Facebook engagement behaviors did not show a consistent pattern between the followers of the two candidates.

scholarly journals Analysis of Facebook Meme Groups Used During the 2016 US Presidential Election

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 205630511880879 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mia Moody-Ramirez ◽  
Andrew B Church
Keyword(s):  
Facial Expressions ◽  
Political Party ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Group Setting ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Political Ideas ◽  
Us Presidential Election ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Facebook Pages

Using content analysis, this study examines how citizens may use memes to share grassroots political ideas in a social media group setting during elections. Specifically, it offers a glimpse at the types of meme-related Facebook pages that emerged during the 2016 presidential election with an emphasis on representations of the two front-runner candidates—Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Generally, Facebook-meme pages and profile photos of both candidates were negative in tone with Trump more likely to be framed in terms of his hairstyle and facial expressions and Clinton in terms of the email scandal and her relationships with people. Political party and gender differences between these two candidates contributed to variations in representations. Study findings are important as they offer a look at grassroots use of memes during a major election and provide a general overview of Facebook user depictions of the two politicians.

Average Joe, Crooked Hillary and the unStable Narcissist: Expert Impressions of 2016 and 2020

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela Book ◽  
Beth Visser ◽  
Anthony Volk
Keyword(s):  
Personality Traits ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Psychopathic Personality ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
2016 Election ◽  
Average Profile ◽  
The U.S

The U.S. 2020 presidential election has, like the 2016 election, brought attention to the two candidates’ personalities. We invited HEXACO researchers to complete observer-report inventories for Joe Biden’s and Donald Trump’s public personalities. Given previous comparison of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump prior to the 2016 election, we are also able to compare the 2020 candidates to the 2016 candidates. Our ratings reveal a relatively average profile of personality traits for Joe Biden, including higher ratings than Trump for Honesty-Humility, Agreeableness, Extraversion, and Conscientiousness. Biden also scores higher on all traits than Clinton other than her slightly higher scores for Conscientiousness and Openness. In comparison to his 2016 ratings, in 2020 Trump is rated as having lower Extraversion and much lower Conscientiousness along with higher Emotionality (especially Fearfulness). Overall, our data once again suggest a Narcissistic profile for Trump, with elements of psychopathic personality traits, while Biden presents as an outgoing individual with slightly above average prosocial traits.

Trump Territory

2019 ◽  
pp. 49-75
Author(s):  
Seth C. McKee ◽  
Daniel A. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
County Level ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Florida County

This chapter assesses changes in presidential election returns at the Florida county level between 2012 and 2016. Florida has been a perennial swing state since 1992, and it was once again a toss-up in 2016 when Republican Donald Trump narrowly defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton. We show that, with respect to density, Democratic presidential nominees fare much better in Florida’s most urban counties whereas Republican candidates are much stronger in the greater number of counties with less metropolitan population.

Differentiating Between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton Voters Using Facets of Right-Wing Authoritarianism and Social-Dominance Orientation

2017 ◽  
Vol 120 (3) ◽  
pp. 364-373 ◽  
Author(s):  
Howard Michael Crowson ◽  
Joyce A. Brandes
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Right Wing Authoritarianism ◽  
Political Outcome ◽  
The Right

Historically, much of the research on right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation has proceeded from the assumption that they are unidimensional. Recently, researchers have begun to seriously consider the possibility that they are multidimensional in nature and should be measured as such. Several studies have examined the unique relationships between right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation facets and social and political outcome measures of interest. However, there have been no efforts to include the full slate of right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation facets as predictors in the same model. This is problematic when investigating the discriminant validity of these facets, given the potential empirical overlap among the facets both within and across scales. We included facets of right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation as predictors of U.S. voters’ intentions to vote for Hillary Clinton versus Donald Trump in the 2016 Presidential Election. Data were collected in September 2016. We found evidence for the discriminant validity of several of the right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation facets.

Experiencing vicarious rejection in the wake of the 2016 presidential election

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-194
Author(s):  
Heather M. Claypool ◽  
Alejandro Trujillo ◽  
Michael J. Bernstein ◽  
Steven Young
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Orientation ◽  
Presidential Candidate ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Social Pain ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Before And After

Presidential elections in the United States pit two (or more) candidates against each other. Voters elect one and reject the others. This work tested the hypothesis that supporters of a losing presidential candidate may experience that defeat as a personal rejection. Before and after the 2016 U.S. presidential election between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, voters reported their current feelings of rejection and social pain, along with potential predictors of these feelings. Relative to Trump supporters, Clinton (losing candidate) supporters reported greater feelings of rejection, lower mood, and reduced fundamental needs post-election, while controlling for pre-election levels of these variables. Moreover, as self–candidate closeness and liberal political orientation increased, so too did feelings of rejection and social pain among Clinton supporters. We discuss the implications of these results for understanding human sensitivity to belonging threats and for the vicarious rejection literature.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document