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

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.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela Book ◽  
Beth Visser ◽  
Anthony Volk

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.


2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evelyn Evelyn ◽  
Sautma Ronni Basana

The U.S. Presidential election was an event that received widespread attention across the globe. In the 2008 presidential campaign, Barrack Obama nominated to be the first black President. In 2016, Hillary Clinton poten­tially becomes the first woman President in American history, while the other can­di­da­te, Donald Trump, ma­de some unpopular and controversial proposals. The purpose of this paper is to ana­­­lyse whether the 2008 and 2016 election were considered as the rele­vant information in the Indonesian Stock Market (IDX). The daily closing prices of all all share listed in IDX wo­uld be examined used event stu­­­dy method. The results provide insight about the res­pon­si­­­veness of IDX parti­ci­pants to the U.S. Pre­si­den­­tial election event that could be used in decision making.


2018 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 239-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seth C. McKee ◽  
Daniel A. Smith ◽  
M. V. (Trey) Hood

ABSTRACTThe surprise outcome of the 2016 presidential election continues to raise more questions as experts grapple with the evidence for why most prognosticators considered a Hillary Clinton victory almost certain. This article uses the 2016 Cooperative Congressional Election Study data to show that a primary explanation for why the election of Donald Trump was difficult to predict is that the bulk of his support did not materialize until Election Day, in the battleground states that he had to carry to win the Electoral College.


2018 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirby Goidel ◽  
Keith Gaddie ◽  
Spencer Goidel

ABSTRACTUsing content analysis and original survey data, we investigated the news coverage and consequences of Donald Trump’s “rigged-election” claims during the 2016 presidential election. We added to previous literature by showing that the effects of such claims were highly contingent on individual partisan affiliation. Republicans and Independents who believed that the elections were rigged via voter fraud or media bias were more likely to report that they intended to vote or had already voted. Democrats and Independents who believed that Hillary Clinton would benefit from voter fraud or media bias were more likely to vote for Donald Trump.


Author(s):  
Robert M. Alexander

This chapter examines the 2016 election through the lens of the Electoral College. The election represents the sixth time the popular vote winner did not win the Electoral College vote. It also represents the most faithless votes cast for president in any presidential election, and it is the second time in the past three elections that a state split its electoral vote between presidential candidates. Particular attention is devoted to the so-called Hamilton elector movement that aimed to have electors select an alternative candidate to Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. A survey of the 2016 Electoral College reveals that a record number of electors considered voting contrary to expectations, and most all electors were lobbied to do so. Electoral College lobbyists consisted of citizens throughout the country and members of the body itself. Reservations over elector discretion draws attention to the differences between the original Electoral College and the evolved body.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 205316802098744
Author(s):  
Kirby Goidel ◽  
Nicholas T. Davis ◽  
Spencer Goidel

In this paper, we utilize a module from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study to explore how individual perceptions of media bias changed over the course of the 2016 presidential campaign. While previous literature has documented the role of partisan affiliation in perceptions of bias, we know considerably less about how these perceptions change during a presidential election. Consistent with existing theories of attitude change, perceptions of bias polarize with strong Democrats moving toward believing the media were biased against Hillary Clinton (and in favor of Donald Trump) and independent-leaning Republicans moving toward believing the media were biased against Donald Trump. At the end of the 2016 election, more individuals believed the media were biased against their side. These effects were moderated by how much attention individuals paid to the campaign.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document