scholarly journals An Analysis of the Media Messages during the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election: A Thematic Comparison between CNN News and Donald Trump’s Tweets

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 78
Author(s):  
Zeinab Ghasemi Tari ◽  
Zahra Emamzadeh
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Thematic Analysis ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Republican Party ◽  
The United States ◽  
Selective Exposure ◽  
Critical Periods ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
American Media ◽  
The Media

In the last presidential election of the United States (2016), the interaction between the Donald Trump and the American media was remarkable and unprecedented from both political and communication perspectives. The present paper is interested in observing the interactions between then the Republican Party candidate, Donald Trump, and the media of the United States. As there were major verbal confrontations between Trump, and some media, specifically CNN, this paper observes how Trump campaign reacted to CNN that turned out to be one of his biggest opponents. The relations and reactions are explained using “agenda setting” and “selective exposure” as theories and “thematic analysis” as the research methodology. The paper analyzes CNN videos from October 7 to October 31, and Trump’s tweets during the same period. The reason for conducting the research during October is that this month is regarded as one of the most critical periods in US presidential election, known as “October surprise”. Then a thematic analysis of the data is conducted to extract all accusations and allegations against Trump. Research results show that President Trump did not react to most of the accusations and attacks raised by CNN. Apparently Trump had decided that ignoring and not responding is a better strategy. There was an exception to this rule: Trump’s treatment toward women. He did address that issue frequently and tried to justify himself and apologize. Accordingly, Trump’s presidential campaign aim was to ignore accusations, keep attacking, and answering accusations only if they are already known to too many people.

Kompromat Goes Global?: Assessing a Russian Media Tool in the United States

Slavic Review ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 76 (S1) ◽  
pp. S57-S65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Oates
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
The United States ◽  
Media Ecology ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
The Us ◽  
American Media ◽  
Russian Media ◽  
The Media

The Russian and American media spheres converged to an unprecedented degree during the 2016 US presidential elections when reports of a possible dossier on Donald Trump emerged. This article considers the degree to which the media tactic of kompromat, which is the Russian abbreviation for “compromising material,” can infiltrate the US media ecology.

scholarly journals Why Would Hispanics Vote for Trump? Explaining the Controversy of the 2016 Election

2020 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-94
Author(s):  
Quinn Galbraith ◽  
Adam Callister
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Republican Party ◽  
The United States ◽  
Presidential Campaign ◽  
Illegal Immigrants ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
2016 Election ◽  
Hispanic Voters

Donald Trump was particularly vocal in shaping his presidential campaign around policies perceived as being anti-immigration. Consequently, many were shocked that Hispanic support for the Republican Party did not drop in the 2016 presidential election. In fact, our survey, which consisted of 1,080 people of Hispanic descent living in the United States, found that 74% of Hispanic Trump voters were in favor of generally deporting all illegal immigrants. Our results suggest that the population of Hispanics who voted in the 2016 presidential election was, on average, more conservative than the overall population of Hispanics living in the United States. Furthermore, our analysis suggests that issues such as the economy, health care, and education were more important to Hispanic voters than were issues related to immigration.

You’re Fired! Donald Trump and the 2020 Congressional Elections

The Forum ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 627-650
Author(s):  
Jamie L. Carson ◽  
Spencer Hardin ◽  
Aaron A. Hitefield
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Vice President ◽  
The United States ◽  
Congressional Elections ◽  
General Election ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Modern Era

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.

A King Cyrus President

2018 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 502-522 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Barrett-Fox
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Political Action ◽  
The United States ◽  
Religious Right ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Moral Majority ◽  
Open Coding

Religious right leaders and voters in the United States supported Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election for the same reason that all blocs vote as they do: They believed that the candidate offered them the best opportunity to protect and extend their power and create their preferred government. The puzzle of their support, then, is less why they chose Trump and more how they navigated the process of inserting Trump into their story of themselves as a “moral” majority. This self-understanding promotes and exploits feelings of entitlement, fear, resentment, and the desire to dominate to encourage political action. Because Trump’s speeches affirm these feelings, religious right voters were open to writing a plot twist in their story, casting Trump as a King Cyrus figure, as their champion if not a coreligionist. This article analyzes appeals to and expressions of entitlement, fear, resentment, and the desire to dominate from more than 60 sermons, speeches, and books by religious right authors, Donald Trump, and Trump surrogates. Using open coding, it identifies themes in how these emotions are recognized, affirmed, and invoked by speakers, focusing on Trump’s Cyrus effect.

The United States confronts Ebola: suasion, executive action and fragmentation

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott L. Greer ◽  
Phillip M. Singer
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
United States ◽  
Republican Party ◽  
Ebola Virus ◽  
The United States ◽  
Health Politics ◽  
Variable Capacity ◽  
The Media ◽  
Executive Action

AbstractThe United States’ experience with the Ebola virus in 2014 provides a window into US public health politics. First, the United States provided a case study in the role of suasion and executive action in the management of public health in a fragmented multi-level system. The variable capacity of different parts of the United States to respond to Ebola on the level of hospitals or state governments, and their different approaches, show the limitations of federal influence, the importance of knowledge and executive energy, and the diversity of both powerful actors and sources of power. Second, the politics of Ebola in the United States is a case study in the politics of partisan blame attribution. The outbreak struck in the run-up to an election that was likely to be good for the Republican party, and the election dominated interest in and opinions of Ebola in both the media and public opinion. Democratic voters and media downplayed Ebola while Republican voters and media focused on the outbreak. The media was a key conduit for this strategic politicization, as shown in the quantity, timing and framing of news about Ebola. Neither fragmentation nor partisanship appears to be going away, so understanding the politics of public health crises will remain important.

Interim results of Donald Trump’s foreign policy

2020 ◽  
pp. 72-81
Author(s):  
N. Klyukin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Political ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Political Activities ◽  
Political Issues ◽  
Approval Ratings ◽  
Leading Position

The article is devoted to the analysis of the political activities of Donald Trump as the president of the United States of America. The key political issues of the United States interaction with countries such as the China, North Korea, Russia, India and Syria. Each of the issues discussed contributes to the creation of a full-fledged image of Trump as a politician who is a tough, unprincipled leader who takes constant risks in order to achieve certain goals. Despite the number of Trump’s opponents and ill-wishers, his decisions mostly bring dividends and open up new opportunities for his country. Many experts argue that it will be difficult for Trump to maintain a leading position in the upcoming presidential election since the current president currently has rather weak approval ratings.

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.

On Not Being Able to Sleep: After the U.S. 2016 Presidential Election

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 318-322
Author(s):  
Ronald J. Pelias
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
The United States ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Political Landscape ◽  
Fragmentary Structure ◽  
The U.S

Following the 2016 U.S. presidential election, I find myself struggling, wanting to find a narrative that will let me sleep, but I am unable to find any comfort in the current political landscape. I call upon a fragmentary structure in this autoethnographic essay to display the troubling thoughts and incidents that have assailed me since the election, to point toward a frightening right wing agenda, and to demonstrate why I cannot sleep. Each numbered section offers evidence that the moral core of the United States has been deeply damaged by the election of Donald Trump.

scholarly journals American media about the "Abraham Agreements" and the role of the Trump administration in their conclusion

2021 ◽  
pp. 0
Author(s):  
Svetlana Margelova
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
The United States ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
American Media ◽  
Trump Administration

The article examines the coverage in the American media of issues related to the signing of agreements, called the "Abraham Agreement", on mutual recognition and normalization of relations between Israel and the UAE, as well as between Israel and Bahrain through the mediation of the United States. The main focus is on comparing the positions of liberal and conservative publications regarding the assessment, motives and consequences of signing agreements, as well as the role of Donald Trump and his administration. Based on the material considered, it is concluded that conservative publications are more consolidated and complementary in their attitude to the "Abraham Agreements", while in liberal publications the spread of opinions is sometimes diametrically opposed, with a noticeable bias towards a skeptical point of view.

scholarly journals Respostas Populistas à Crise do Coronavírus: Análise dos Twitters de Donald Trump e Jair Bolsonaro

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 81-103
Author(s):  
Andressa Costa ◽  
◽  
Ana Bernardi ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
The United States ◽  
Global Scale ◽  
Fake News ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
International Media ◽  
The World ◽  
The Media ◽  
New Challenges

The coronavirus pandemic has suddenly and fast emerged, bringing new challenges on a global scale. Brazil and the United States have been for months the two countries with most cases and deaths by Covid-19 in the world, until India surpassed Brazil, and only on the number of cases. Therefore, there are similarities in the way their presidents have been dealing with the crisis. Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro have been in standout on international media by their poor leadership in face of the crises created by the pandemic. Both presidents have politicized the crisis, standing against scientific evidence and world recommendations. Contrary to social isolation, they have antagonized governors and mayors, intensifying conflicts despite the lost lives, disqualifying the media as fake news. Given that, this paper aims to analyse how the populist leaders, in Brazil and in the United States, have responded to the coronavirus crisis in terms of actions and discourses. For this purpose, we analyse tweets from both their official Twitter accounts, on the period from the first official recorded case until the milestone of 100 thousand deaths in each country.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document