Did Gender Sway the Vote?

Rhetoric and the 2016

Presidential Debates
Presented by Kyrylo Kuchynskyi
Gender and Rhetoric in the 2016 US Presidential
Debates: Trump vs. Clinton
The 2016 US presidential election was a watershed moment in American
politics, marked by a stark contrast in the rhetoric and argumentation styles of
the two candidates: Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Gender played a
significant role in shaping both the public discourse and the candidates'
approaches, leading to distinct advantages and disadvantages for each.
Hillary Clinton
● Rhetoric: Clinton employed a more traditional, policy-oriented approach, focusing
on detailed plans and specific proposals. She aimed to appear knowledgeable and
experienced, appealing to voters seeking a steady hand in leadership.
● Argumentation: Clinton relied on factual evidence and statistics to support her
arguments, often drawing on her long record of public service. This approach
resonated with voters who value expertise and experience.
● Gender Impact: Clinton's gender presented both challenges and opportunities.
While some voters saw her experience as an asset, others viewed her as part of the
establishment, lacking the "outsider" appeal Trump enjoyed. Additionally, some sexist
remarks and media coverage played into pre-existing gender stereotypes about
female leaders.
Donald Trump
● Rhetoric: Trump employed a populist, emotional style, focusing on broad
appeals to patriotism, security, and economic prosperity. He used simple
language and direct attacks, connecting with voters who felt disillusioned with
the status quo.
● Argumentation: Trump often used anecdotal evidence and personal attacks,
appealing to emotions rather than detailed policy specifics. This approach
resonated with voters who prioritized change and disruption over established
norms.
● Gender Impact: Trump's gender played a complex role. While some voters were
drawn to his perceived strength and assertiveness, others found his behavior
and rhetoric offensive and disrespectful, particularly towards women. His
comments about women and his past actions became significant points of
contention throughout the campaign.
Comparative analysis
● Style: Clinton's style was measured and intellectual, while Trump's was impulsive and emotional. This difference
resonated with different segments of the electorate, appealing to voters seeking stability vs. change.
● Content: Clinton focused on policy specifics, while Trump focused on broad themes and appeals. This difference
reflected their backgrounds and experiences, with Clinton emphasizing her expertise and Trump capitalizing on
his outsider status.
● Gender: Both candidates faced challenges and opportunities due to their gender. Clinton navigated pre-existing
stereotypes about female leaders, while Trump's behavior and rhetoric towards women became a major point of
contention.
Clinton's Challenges
● "Experience card": While Clinton emphasized her extensive experience, some saw it as "establishment baggage" and
questioned her ability to connect with everyday voters. Her detailed policy proposals could be perceived as verbose and
overwhelming compared to Trump's simpler messages.
● Navigating stereotypes: Clinton faced subtle and overt sexism throughout the campaign. Some media coverage focused
on her appearance and demeanor, while comments about her "likeability" played into traditional expectations of female
leaders.

Examples:

● Trump: "Look at that face! Would anyone vote for that face?" (referring to Fiorina)
● Media narratives focusing on Clinton's pantsuits vs. Trump's attire.
Trump's Opportunities
● "Outsider" image: Trump leveraged his lack of political experience as an advantage, claiming he wasn't part of the "corrupt" establishment.
His blunt language and direct attacks resonated with voters seeking change and disruption, particularly white working-class men.
● Gendered appeals: Trump often used appeals to traditional gender roles, portraying himself as a strong protector and Clinton as a weak
figure unfit for leadership.

Examples:

● Trump: "I will protect our women better than any other candidate because you know I will keep America great again."
● Trump: "She doesn't have the look or stamina to be president."

Impact on Voters:

● Studies suggest women were more likely to be turned off by Trump's behavior and rhetoric, while men were more receptive to his style.
● However, gender wasn't the sole factor. Race, class, and economic anxieties also played crucial roles in shaping voter preferences.
Gender and Power Dynamics
● Clinton's experience vs. Trump's outsider status: Hillary Clinton, the first female major party nominee, faced scrutiny of
her qualifications and experience, often framed in ways that questioned her competence or likability. Donald Trump, a
political outsider, benefited from a perception of authenticity and lack of establishment ties.
● Interruptions and speaking time: Studies have shown that Trump interrupted Clinton more frequently, potentially
limiting her ability to articulate her positions. This dynamic could be interpreted as reflecting underlying gender biases
or power imbalances.
● Use of language and nonverbal cues: Both candidates used language and nonverbal cues that could be interpreted as
gendered. For example, Clinton was sometimes described as "shrill" or "emotional," while Trump was seen as "assertive" or
"strong."
Media Coverage and Public Perception
● Focus on appearance and personal attacks: Media coverage often focused on the candidates' appearances
and personal lives, particularly in the case of Clinton. This can overshadow policy discussions and reinforce
gender stereotypes.
● Public opinion on likability and trustworthiness: Polls showed gender disparities in candidate
favorability, with Clinton often scoring higher on trustworthiness but lower on likability, while Trump
scored higher on likability but lower on trustworthiness. This could reflect implicit biases or different
expectations for male and female candidates.
Impact on the Election and Beyond
● While difficult to isolate definitively, some studies suggest gender played a role in voters' decisions, with
women more likely to support Clinton and men more likely to support Trump.
● The 2016 election highlighted the challenges women face in politics and the continued presence of
gender bias in political discourse. These issues continue to be debated and addressed in contemporary
political contexts.
References
● "Exploring Gendered Nonverbal Behavior in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Debates" by Sarah Pedersen and Kimberly Smith
● "Gender Differences in Emotional Reactions to the First 2016 Presidential Debate" by David A. Gerstner and Daniel M.
Weijand
● "The 2016 Campaign: What Did We Learn?" by Kathleen Hall Jamieson