This paper argues that Trump being an outsider resulted in a candidate that is not like what you would expect in normal candidates. The paper finds that Trump and Clinton both campaigned for policy but Trump’s approach will result in a difference in attitude development because Trump used the notions presented in social identity theory and predictive appeals while he campaigned for policy in regards to illegal immigration. Watching videos like the one on the Washington Post article, with the crowds chanting "Build the Wall" creates a phenomenon where Trump could be considered an unique candidate. The result of a candidate like Trump was that his voters attitude development was less influenced by political identity. In order to understand this phenomenon, the discussion of attitudes needs to take place.
Table of Contents
1. Attitudes and Their Relation to Issue Voting
2. Demographics and its Relation to Issue Voting
3. Political Knowledge and Its Relation to Issue Voting
4. 2016 Presidential Election
5. Data and Methods
6. Results
7. Discussion
8. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Core Themes
This paper investigates the impact of Donald Trump's candidacy on voter attitude development during the 2016 Presidential election, specifically exploring how his unique rhetoric regarding illegal immigration influenced voters differently than traditional political approaches. The research seeks to determine whether Trump's status as an outsider and his use of predictive appeals effectively decoupled voter attitudes from established partisan identities.
- Analysis of Social Identity Theory in the context of voter behavior.
- Examination of how political knowledge and demographics influence issue voting.
- Evaluation of Trump's rhetorical strategy regarding illegal immigration.
- Statistical assessment of factors driving attitude development for Trump vs. Clinton voters.
Excerpt from the Book
The rhetoric above represents the predictive appeal that was discussed in the paper.
What this means is that Donald Trump is trying to present the consequences of the alternative, such as amnesty. This type of rhetoric relates to the above discussion on social identity theory. This idea of creating the us versus them argument. In this sense, it is the Trump voter versus the undocumented immigrant. Therefore, trying to influence the voter in regards to undocumented immigration. This idea is central to the entire paper, and what this paper expects to find.
With using previous research, this paper will explore the attitude development of the voters in the 2016 election in regards to both the Trump and Clinton voter. What was apparent in the quotes from the debate above, Trump’s rhetoric towards undocumented immigration was completely different from what Clinton argued for and Trump made that very clear. Therefore, what this paper expects to find is that both groups of voters will have different attitudes towards undocumented immigration and the explanation for this will differ as well. Therefore, the assumption of this paper is that using what the research has shown in previous elections, and from the what is known about the 2016 election, it can be expected that the two voting groups have different explanations for the opinions they have towards undocumented immigration.
Chapter Summaries
Attitudes and Their Relation to Issue Voting: This chapter defines attitudes as a system of beliefs and introduces social identity theory to explain how psychological attachments to parties influence individual behavior and issue-based voting.
Demographics and its Relation to Issue Voting: This section explores how racial background and self-identified ideological labels function as markers of group identity, influencing how voters align with political parties and candidates.
Political Knowledge and Its Relation to Issue Voting: The chapter examines the correlation between political sophistication, educational levels, and a voter’s ability to process complex economic policies and evaluate political actors.
2016 Presidential Election: This chapter contextualizes the 2016 race by highlighting how authoritarianism and fear influenced voter attitudes during the primaries, setting the stage for the general election rhetoric.
Data and Methods: This section outlines the quantitative approach, utilizing the 2016 American National Election Study (ANES) and ordinary least squares regression to measure variables like party identification, ideology, and education.
Results: This chapter presents the statistical regression analysis, comparing the determinants of favorability towards illegal immigration among Trump and Clinton voters.
Discussion: This section interprets the statistical findings, suggesting that while party remains relevant for Clinton voters, it was effectively muted for Trump voters in the context of immigration rhetoric.
Conclusion: This final chapter synthesizes the findings, confirming that Donald Trump’s rhetoric successfully suppressed traditional party attachments, marking him as an atypical candidate in American electoral history.
Keywords
2016 Presidential Election, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Social Identity Theory, Issue Voting, Illegal Immigration, Predictive Appeals, Party Identification, Political Knowledge, Authoritarianism, Voter Attitudes, Ideology, Demographic Factors, Microtargeting, Political Rhetoric.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this research paper?
The paper examines how Donald Trump’s specific rhetoric during the 2016 Presidential election influenced the formation of voter attitudes, particularly regarding the issue of illegal immigration.
What are the central thematic pillars of the study?
The study centers on social identity theory, the influence of political knowledge on public opinion, the role of demographic factors in voting, and the strategic use of campaign rhetoric.
What is the core research question addressed by the author?
The author investigates how much of an impact Trump's unique candidacy and outsider status had on the electorate, specifically asking if his approach changed how voters develop their attitudes on policy issues.
Which scientific methodology is employed for this analysis?
The author uses quantitative analysis, specifically ordinary least squares regression, applied to data from the 2016 American National Election Study (ANES).
What does the main body of the paper cover?
The main body covers the theoretical foundations of issue voting, the significance of demographic identity, the impact of political sophistication on understanding policy, and a statistical comparison of Trump and Clinton voters.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include social identity theory, issue voting, predictive appeals, 2016 election, party identification, and voter attitude development.
How did the author define 'predictive appeals' in the context of Trump's campaign?
Predictive appeals refer to rhetoric that highlights the negative or positive consequences of a policy alternative, such as Trump's framing of amnesty or illegal immigration as a disaster for national security.
What significant difference did the study find between Trump and Clinton voters?
The study found that while traditional party identification remained a strong predictor for Clinton voters, it was statistically insignificant for Trump voters, who were instead influenced more heavily by his specific campaign rhetoric.
What role does 'social identity theory' play in the author's findings?
Social identity theory explains how voters align with 'in-groups' and 'out-groups'. The author concludes that Trump’s rhetoric created an 'us versus them' dynamic that superseded traditional party loyalty for his supporters.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Raj Telwala (Autor:in), 2018, Differences between the voters of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton and the development of different attitudes towards illegal immigration, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/412498
