scholarly journals Moral-Language Use by U.S. Political Elites

2020 ◽  
pp. 095679762096039
Author(s):  
Sze-Yuh Nina Wang ◽  
Yoel Inbar

We used a distributed-language model to examine the moral language employed by U.S. political elites. In Study 1, we analyzed 687,360 Twitter messages (tweets) posted by accounts belonging to Democratic and Republican members of Congress from 2016 to 2018. In Study 2, we analyzed 2,630,688 speeches given on the floor of the House and Senate from 1981 to 2017. We found that partisan differences in moral-language use shifted over time as the parties gained or lost political power. Overall, lower political power was associated with greater use of moral language for both Democrats and Republicans. On Twitter, Democrats used more moral language in the period after Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election. In Congressional transcripts, both Democrats and Republicans used more of most kinds of moral language when they were in the minority.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sze Yuh Nina Wang ◽  
Yoel Inbar

We use a distributed language model to examine the moral language used by U.S. political elites. In Study 1, we analyze 687,360 Twitter messages (“tweets”) posted by accounts belonging to Democratic and Republican members of Congress from 2016-2018. In Study 2, we analyze 2,630,688 speeches given on the floor of the House and Senate from 1981-2017. We find that partisan differences in moral language use shift over time as the parties gain or lose political power. Overall, lower political power was associated with greater use of moral language for both Democrats and Republicans. On Twitter, Democrats used more moral language in the period after Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election. In Congressional transcripts, both Democrats and Republicans used more of most kinds of moral language when they were in the minority.


Even before the 2016 presidential election took place, groups and individuals angry at Donald Trump, and frightened about what a Trump presidency could mean, were taking to the streets. After the election, and particularly after the Inaugural, the protests continued. Over time, the Resistance was joined by a broad variety of groups and embraced an increasing diversity of tactics. The Resistance details the emergence of a volatile and diverse movement directed against the Trump presidency. Bringing together a diverse group of scholars of social movements and American politics, the collection examines the origins and concerns of different factions of this movement and evaluates their prospects for surviving and exercising political influence. The authors also reflect on how existing scholarship on social protest movements helps us understand the Resistance movement, and what the movement tells us about social movements more generally.


2021 ◽  
pp. 135406882098863
Author(s):  
Rosalyn Cooperman ◽  
Gregory Shufeldt ◽  
Kimberly Conger

Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump secured their respective party’s 2016 nominations only after raucous, spirited debates among delegates at the start of each party convention. Groups and their preferred candidates behaved consistently with the policy demanders view of parties, which identifies parties as comprised of coalitions of groups with strong policy preferences that negotiate with one another for influence in the party decision-making and policy process. Using the 2016 Convention Delegate Study, the longest standing survey of Democratic and Republican Party activists, we examine intra-party groups as new delegates are folded into the framework along with returning delegates. We assess how the theory of parties as comprised of policy-demander groups works in a context of high external party polarization. The competition between these groups to recast their party in its preferred image in the absence of a standard party bearer for either party holds important implications for Democrats and Republicans in future presidential and congressional elections.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anton Gollwitzer ◽  
Cameron Martel ◽  
William J. Brady ◽  
Philip Pärnamets ◽  
Isaac Freedman ◽  
...  

Numerous polls suggest that COVID-19 is a profoundly partisan issue in the U.S. Using the geotracking data of 15 million smartphones per day, we found that U.S. counties that voted for Donald Trump (Republican) over Hillary Clinton (Democrat) in the 2016 presidential election exhibited 14% less physical distancing between March and May 2020. Partisanship was more strongly associated with physical distancing than numerous factors, including counties’ median income, COVID-19 cases, population density, and racial and age demographics. Contrary to our predictions, the observed partisan gap strengthened over time and remained when stay-at-home orders were active. Additionally, county-level consumption of conservative media (Fox News) related to reduced physical distancing. Finally, the observed partisan differences in distancing were associated with subsequently higher COVID-19 infection and fatality growth rates in pro-Trump counties. Taken together, these data suggest that U.S. citizens’ responses to COVID-19 are subject to a deep—and consequential—partisan divide.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gordon Pennycook ◽  
David Gertler Rand

The 2020 U.S. Presidential Election saw an unprecedented number of false claims alleging election fraud and arguing that Donald Trump was the actual winner of the election. Here we report a survey exploring belief in these false claims that was conducted three days after Biden was declared the winner. We find that a majority of Trump voters in our sample – particularly those who were more politically knowl-edgeable and more closely following election news – falsely believed that election fraud was wide-spread and that Trump won the election. Thus, false beliefs about the election are not merely a fringe phenomenon. We also find that Trump conceding or losing his legal challenges would likely lead a ma-jority of Trump voters to accept Biden’s victory as legitimate, although 40% said they would continue to view Biden as illegitimate regardless. Finally, we found that levels of partisan spite and endorsement of violence were equivalent between Trump and Biden voters.


Author(s):  
Мохаммад Исаак Шафак

Аннотация: В данной статье автор исследовал феномен победы действующего президента Мохаммада Аршаф Гани, выигравшего во второй раз президентские выборы у своих оппонентов, его персональные качества в отличие от его оппонентов, проигравших выборы на пример Абдуллы Абдуллы. Названы глубинные причины возникновения политического кризиса, как недоговороспособность политических элит Афганистана, разрозненных личными и местечковыми интересами своих кланов. Сделан анализ, почему годами оставаясь у власти, оппоненты Ашрафа Гани, не использовали свои властные полномочия не улучшили политическую ситуацию Афганистана. Автором приведены аналитические выводы их отрицательного влияния на развитие политических процессов, это связано большей частью для сохранения собственных корыстных интересов и благ. Автор на примере анализа деятельности президента и его оппонентов на выборах, выразил собственное экспертную оценку вокруг сложившийся политической ситуации вновь избранного действующего президента Ашрафа Гани Ахмадзая, как политической персоны, выделив его слабые и сильные стороны и оппонентов. Ключевые слова: феномен победы, политический кризис, выборы. Аннотация: Автордун бул илимий макаласында, Мохаммад Ашраф Ганидин экинчи мөөнөткө 2019 -жылы 28-сентябрда болуп өткөн президенттик шайлоодо атаандаштарын утушу, Абдулла Абдулла жана да башка оппонентеринин президенттик шайлоодогу жеке сапаттарын изилдеген. Ооган саясий элитасынын ар түрдүү жеке жана ичи тардык, кызгануу сыяктуу эле кызыкчылыктарын, саясий башаламандык кыймылы жөнүндө жана ошол себептер менен саясий кризис курчуунун негизги себептерин атады. Алардын (эски элитанын) бийликте калуу максатында кыймылдарынын терс таасири тууралуу аналитикалык корутунду көрсөттү, бул инсандар негизинен өздөрүнүн жеке керт башынын кызыкчылыктары менен пайдасын сактоо менен байланыштуу, шайлоодо президенттин иш-аракеттери жана оппоненттери боюнча сереп-талдоо жазылган. Ооганстандагы саясый кырдаал жакшырган жок, саясий жараяндар таатал боюнча калууда, Ашраф Гани менен оппоненттеринин күчтүү жактарын жана кемчиликтери касиеттери жөнүндө, учурдагы Ооганстанда саясий кырдаал тууралуу өзүнүн серебин билдирди. Түйүндүү сөздөр: жеңүүнүн феномени, саясий кризис, шайлоо Annotation: In this article, the author explored the phenomenon of victory of incumbent President Mohammad Ashraf Ghani, who won the second time the presidential election against his opponents, his personal qualities, unlike his opponents, who lost theelection by the example of Abdullah Abdullah. The underlying causes of the political crisis are identified as the lack of maturity of the political elites of Afghanistan, fragmented by the personal and local interests of their clans. An analysis is made of why staying in power for years, opponents of Ashraf Ghani, did not use their power, did not improve the political situation in Afghanistan, the author gives analytical conclusions of their negative impact on the development of political processes, this is mainly due to preserving their own selfish interests and benefits. The author, using an example of analysis of the activities of the president and his opponents in the elections, expressed his own expert assessment around the current political situation of the newly elected incumbent president Ashraf Gani Ahmadzai as a political person, highlighting his weaknesses and strengths and opponents. Keywords: the phenomenon of victory, political crisis, elections.


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.


2021 ◽  
pp. 000276422110112
Author(s):  
Meredith Neville-Shepard

This essay illustrates how Donald Trump engaged in what I call “populist crisis rhetoric” throughout the COVID-19 pandemic and coinciding 2020 U.S. presidential campaign cycle. By performing a critical rhetorical analysis of textual fragments surrounding how Trump addressed the preventative measure of mask-wearing, I show how he rejected the role of comforter-in-chief and instead opted for the role of victim-in-chief. Specifically, turning the bare face into a litmus test of Trump loyalism, his rhetoric suggested that masks threatened masculinity and functioned as a form of anti-choice bodily oppression.


The Forum ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 627-650
Author(s):  
Jamie L. Carson ◽  
Spencer Hardin ◽  
Aaron A. Hitefield

Abstract The 2020 elections brought to an end one of the most divisive and historic campaigns in the modern era. Former Vice President Joe Biden was elected the 46th President of the United States with the largest number of votes ever cast in a presidential election, defeating incumbent President Donald Trump in the process. The record turnout was especially remarkable in light of the ongoing pandemic surrounding COVID-19 and the roughly 236,000 Americans who had died of the virus prior to the election. This article examines the electoral context of the 2020 elections focusing on elections in both the House and Senate. More specifically, this article examines the candidates, electoral conditions, trends, and outcomes in the primaries as well as the general election. In doing so, we provide a comprehensive descriptive analysis of the climate and outcome of the 2020 congressional elections. Finally, the article closes with a discussion of the broader implications of the election outcomes on both the incoming 117th Congress as well as the upcoming 2022 midterm election.


2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 130-144 ◽  
Author(s):  
KEES DE BOT ◽  
CAROL JAENSCH

While research on third language (L3) and multilingualism has recently shown remarkable growth, the fundamental question of what makes trilingualism special compared to bilingualism, and indeed monolingualism, continues to be evaded. In this contribution we consider whether there is such a thing as a true monolingual, and if there is a difference between dialects, styles, registers and languages. While linguistic and psycholinguistic studies suggest differences in the processing of a third, compared to the first or second language, neurolinguistic research has shown that generally the same areas of the brain are activated during language use in proficient multilinguals. It is concluded that while from traditional linguistic and psycholinguistic perspectives there are grounds to differentiate monolingual, bilingual and multilingual processing, a more dynamic perspective on language processing in which development over time is the core issue, leads to a questioning of the notion of languages as separate entities in the brain.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document