scholarly journals EFFECT OF 2008 AND 2016 U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IN THE INDONESIAN STOCK MARKET

2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evelyn Evelyn ◽  
Sautma Ronni Basana
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Stock Market ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Presidential Campaign ◽  
The Other ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
2016 Election ◽  
Black President ◽  
The U.S

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.

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.

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.

“I’m (Not) with Her”

2020 ◽  
pp. 209-240
Author(s):  
Melissa Ames
Keyword(s):  
Homeland Security ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Presidential Campaign ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Presidential Debates ◽  
Final Study ◽  
Live Broadcast ◽  
Ongoing Dialogue

The final study presented in this book focuses on one of the most impactful events of the 21st century: the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election, which likely ended as it did in part due to a combination of the cultural fears discussed throughout the previous chapters. For example, the presidential campaign run by Donald Trump played on post-9/11 insecurities about homeland security and employed fear-based, divisive rhetoric about race, gender, class, and sexuality. The acceptance of this rhetoric -- and his ultimate victory -- may be explained by the process of phobic construction highlighted in this text. Chapter 10 analyzes the final months of the election cycle, in particular the televised presidential debates between Trump and Hillary Clinton and the ways in which they stimulated conversation among viewers during the live broadcast and ongoing dialogue and activism beyond it.

scholarly journals Playing the Trump Card: Masculinity Threat and the U.S. 2016 Presidential Election

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 237802311774069 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily K. Carian ◽  
Tagart Cain Sobotka
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Study ◽  
Gender Identity ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Potential Mechanism ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
The Status ◽  
Masculinity Threat ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Differential Support

Using an experimental study fielded before the U.S. 2016 presidential election, we test one potential mechanism to explain the outcome of the election: threatened gender identity. Building on masculine overcompensation literature, we test whether threat to masculinity can explain differential support for Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton among men, and adjudicate between two mediators: desire for a male president and desire for a masculine president. As predicted, we find that masculinity threat increases desire for a masculine president (but not desire for a male president), which in turn increases support for Trump and decreases support for Clinton among men. This study empirically documents the role masculinity threat may have played in the 2016 presidential election and politics more generally. This study also contributes to theory by providing evidence that masculine overcompensation works symbolically to reassert the status of masculinity over femininity rather than to simply emphasize maleness over femaleness.

The life of the parties: Party activists and the 2016 presidential election

2021 ◽  
pp. 135406882098863
Author(s):  
Rosalyn Cooperman ◽  
Gregory Shufeldt ◽  
Kimberly Conger
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Policy Process ◽  
Republican Party ◽  
Congressional Elections ◽  
Policy Preferences ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Party Activists ◽  
Democrats And Republicans

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.

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.

Setting the agenda in a distant nation: The 2016 US presidential election in a New Zealand newspaper

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 141-161
Author(s):  
Shah Nister Kabir
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Republican Party ◽  
Democratic Party ◽  
The Other ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
The Media ◽  
Us Presidential Election ◽  
Media Outlet

AbstractExamining the coverage of the 2016 US Presidential election of the highest circulating New Zealand newspaper—the New Zealand Herald (NZH)—this study argues that this newspaper sets agenda against Donald Trump—the Republican Party candidate in the 2016 US election. Examining all news, editorials and photographs published in NZH, it discursively argues that this newspaper overshadowed and dehumanized Trump and especially his leadership ability. The other major candidate—the Democratic Party candidate Hillary Clinton—was applauded in the coverage. The NZH repeatedly focused upon the activities of Trump through news, views and images to dehumanize him. The repetition, therefore, does not necessarily mean that a particular media outlet favors a particular candidate. It also argues that the media outlet of a distant nation that cannot influence its reader to vote for a particular candidate may still set the agenda in favor of a candidate.

Alexander Hamilton and the 2016 Election

2019 ◽  
pp. 151-175
Author(s):  
Robert M. Alexander
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
The Body ◽  
Electoral College ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Alexander Hamilton ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Presidential Candidates ◽  
The Past ◽  
Electoral Vote ◽  
2016 Election

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.

scholarly journals Partisan differences in physical distancing are linked to health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anton Gollwitzer ◽  
Cameron Martel ◽  
William J. Brady ◽  
Philip Pärnamets ◽  
Isaac Freedman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Population Density ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Median Income ◽  
County Level ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Fox News ◽  
Conservative Media ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Over Time

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document