Gender and Candidate Communication: An Analysis of Televised Ads in the 2020 US Senate Races

Recent studies of the content of television ads of female versus male political candidates have shown that women and men are increasingly similar in their communication styles and strategies, with some notable exceptions. However, few studies examining gender and political ad content have focused exclusively on US Senate races, considered the influence of the candidates’ political party, or compared the messages of women running against female versus male opponents. This study examines 236 political ads—160 from mixed-gender and 76 from female–female—U.S. Senate races in 2020 for their verbal and visual content. Results show gendered and partisan differences in the issues emphasized and the tone used. Candidates were similar in the images emphasized. Female candidates were more balanced between formal and casual attire compared to previous election cycles. And candidates in mixed-gender races used different strategies than those in female–female contests as to the issues and political actors mentioned.

Turkey

This chapter focuses on legislative speechmaking patterns in Turkey over four election cycles between 1995 and 2011. Specifically, the chapter aims to test the theory of legislative speechmaking outlined earlier in this volume, where political parties in closed-list proportional electoral systems are hypothesized to have full control over the speakers’ list to ensure the party discipline and unity. Results based on 35,000 legislative speeches made by over 2100 MPs do not support some elements of the outlined theory. In particular, I show that as the number of terms served in the parliament increases, the propensity to take the legislative floor decreases. Additionally, government party MPs are significantly less likely to take the floor. However, in line with the theory, cabinet ministers take the floor much more frequently, relative to others. The implications of these findings are discussed in the context of the theory of legislative speechmaking around the world.

Allocating Unlimited Money: What Explains Super PAC Spending in Congressional Elections?

How do Super PACs allocate their resources? The question is both timely and relevant, particularly as we reflect on the ten-year anniversary of the Citizens United ruling. Super PACs now outspend – sometimes by huge margins, as in the 2016 presidential election – all other groups’ independent expenditures including those of parties, unions, and 501(c) organizations. The issue is especially important in congressional politics, where Super PACs have an opportunity to shape the institution every two years through congressional elections. Utilizing outside spending data from the Center for Responsive Politics, we analyze four U.S. House election cycles since the Supreme Court’s landmark 2010 Citizens United ruling (2012–2018). The likelihood that Super PACs invest in a race is strongly determined by the electoral context, even after controlling for the legislative influence of the incumbent member of Congress.

Active Is as Active Does: Deliberative and Non-deliberative Political Communication in Context

The development of theories of citizens’ political communication has been hindered by a debate over whether such communication is best characterized as deliberative or non-deliberative. This article aims to overcome that impasse with a new account of citizens’ political communication informed by theories of message production and sense-making: the goals–sense-making–justification (GSJ) model. This model holds that citizens’ political-communicative behavior is influenced by multiple goals and cognitive plans, which generally vary in different contexts. This variation helps to explain why citizens’ informal political discussions during non-election periods rarely feature reason-giving—and so can be understood as non-deliberative—whereas such discussions during major-election campaigns often feature the reason-giving that is characteristic of deliberation. Moreover, the model demonstrates how cognitive plans developed in informal political discussions over repeated major-election cycles enable citizens to engage competently in reason-giving during formal deliberations.

Tactical Voting and Electoral Pacts in the 2019 UK General Election

The Brexit cleavage continued to define politics in the 2019 general election. This posed a challenge for parties and voters on each side of the debate: how to coordinate in favour of their side in each seat. In this note, I examine the extent to which party (electoral pacts) and voter (tactical voting) coordination affected the outcome of the 2019 general election. On the voter side, I find that tactical voting was only slightly more prevalent than in previous election cycles. On the party side, I find that neither the Unite to Remain pact nor the Brexit Party’s withdrawal of candidates against incumbent Conservatives noticeably affected the results. Holding the structure of preferences in 2019 constant, Labour would probably have won a handful of additional seats in England and Wales (three on average but only one clear gain) by joining the Unite to Remain pact. The effect of the pact is limited because Labour successfully won over many Remain supporters from the other parties during the campaign. This meant that voters of the other Remain parties were only modestly more likely to prefer Labour over the Conservatives by the end of the campaign, and the pool of minor party voters was generally small in Labour’s target seats. The Liberal Democrats would have received around eight additional seats if Labour had joined the pact (again holding preferences constant).

Collecting Pennsylvania Political Twitter Data

During the two most recent elections we have seen the importance of social media, and Twitter in particular, for political discourse. This paper describes the effort of an academic library to collect election-related Twitter data from Pennsylvania-specific organizational accounts and hashtags for 2018 and 2020 in the run-up and aftermath of both election cycles. Because of its importance to understanding contemporary politics and its historic value, libraries need to consider the opportunity to collect and make this data accessible to Pennsylvanians.

Going Feminine: Identifying How and When Female Candidates Emphasize Feminine and Masculine Traits on the Campaign Trail

Female candidates face a messaging challenge. There is a strong association between masculinity and political leadership. Stressing masculinity can result in a likability backlash for female candidates often seen as lacking feminine qualities, such as warmth. Preventing a likability backlash by highlighting feminine qualities can also harm female candidates. Current scholarship offers conflicting conclusions about how female candidates balance these gendered challenges. We fill this empirical and theoretical gap with a trait-balancing theory clarifying how and when female candidates use feminine and masculine traits to manage competing expectations. We use original data merging information on candidate advertising strategies across three election cycles. We show that female candidates strategically balance masculine and feminine stereotypes in ways that often differ from their male counterparts but also differ based on female candidate partisanship and incumbency. These results are consequential because they highlight how female candidates manage gendered pressures in campaign strategies, which can affect their ability to win elections and, ultimately, women’s representation in government.