Constructing images in presidential primaries: an analysis of discourse strategies in the Dole and Bush Iowa straw poll speeches.

• Author: Banwart, Mary Christine
• Position: Elizabeth Dole, George W. Bush

American politics often is regarded as a male institution. From the perspective of representation, this view is difficult to deny. Since the founding of our country, 98% of our congressional representatives and 100% of the major party candidates for president have been men; female representation in Congress did not surpass 10% until 1993 and still constitutes only 16% (Center for American Women and Politics [CAWP], 2006a). Therefore, when scholars explore the construct of the ideal presidential candidate it is reasonable to assume that this construct might be grounded in and favor a male image. Although ideal presidential candidate image traits appear to be consistent over time (Miller, Wattenberg, & Malanchuk, 1984, 1986; Trent, Short-Thompson, Mongeau, Nusz, & Trent, 2001), the research on which this finding is based examines contests featuring only viable male candidates. As they become recognized as viable contenders for our country's highest executive post, therefore, the questions arise: Can women portray the ideal presidential candidate? Will their strategic choices in projecting this image differ fundamentally from men?

Just before the new millennium, the Republican presidential primaries presented an opportunity to explore these questions. Elizabeth Dole's campaign for the Republican presidential nomination marked the first time that a woman was considered to be a viable presidential candidate (Heith, 2001; Heldman, Carroll, & Olson, 2005; Seelye, 1999). By taking her place on the national stage among a lineup of male Republican hopefuls early in the primary season, Dole challenged the polity to take a female candidate seriously. Research clearly documents that news media coverage of Dole's campaign was less favorable and more gendered than coverage of her competitors (Heldman et al., 2005). When she controlled the discourse-as in her public addresses-however, did Dole present the image of a viable presidential candidate to voters? Might Dole's communication strategies inform the campaigns of future female presidential contenders?

This study seeks to understand whether and how gender shapes candidates' strategies in creating a presidential image. It analyzes image development in the speeches of Republican presidential candidates, Elizabeth Dole and George W. Bush, during the 1999 Iowa straw poll. Through the lens of a presidential candidate prototype, this study compares the candidates' image building strategies and thus the influence of gender on these strategies.

WOMEN AS POLITICAL CANDIDATES

Understanding whether and how gender interacts with the ideal presidential candidate prototype is important as women assume more visible roles as elected leaders in government. Women are emerging onto the national stage as serious and viable candidates in presidential primaries. Although Elizabeth Dole is considered "the first woman to be perceived as a serious Presidential prospect" (Seelye, 1999, p. A1), she is not the first woman to run for President of the United States.

In 1872, Victoria Claflin Woodhull ran against incumbent, Ulysses S. Grant, and editor, Horace Greeley, on the Equal Rights Party ticket (CAWP, 2006b). In 1964, Senator Margaret Chase Smith became the first woman to seek a major party nomination, receiving votes in five state primaries and 27 first-ballot votes at the Republican national convention, after which she withdrew (CAWP, 2006b). In 1972, Shirley Anita Chisholm became the first African American woman to run for president and the first woman to seek the Democratic nomination (CAWP, 2006b). She was on the party's ballot in 12 states (CAWP, 2006b). Through 2004, 6 women have run for president as minor party candidates and 15 have sought a major party's nomination.

Now, eight years after Dole's effort, Hillary Rodham Clinton is seeking the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination and, to date, has exceeded Dole in fundraising, polling numbers, and time in the primary trenches. Dole's 1999 bid offers an important point of comparison with Rodham Clinton's effort and, more generally, creates a baseline for study of female candidates' increasing prominence. Studies of media coverage, the role of immediate family, voter responses, and image building tactics in Dole's campaign can shed light on Rodham Clinton's campaign in a very different electoral climate. Studies of their campaigns can promote better understanding of women's advancements and the barriers they still face.

Female Candidates and Gender Stereotypes

Granted, women are running for local, state, and national offices with greater success than a decade ago; yet, women do not hold office in numbers at all proportional to their numbers in the population. (1) Further, there is concern that, when the time comes, Americans may not vote for a qualified female presidential candidate (Mandel, 2007). Despite the gains by women in politics, it remains fair to ask whether America is ready for a female in the Oval Office.

A majority of Americans now regularly responds that it is willing to vote for a female president (for a review, see Falk & Kenski, 2006; Kenski & Falk, 2004; Lawless, 2004). Yet, whether Americans' attitudes about female and male presidential candidates make it possible for women to be perceived as credible presidential material is questionable. Unfortunately, evidence of gender stereotyping in politics continues to raise doubt. For instance, stereotypically masculine traits of toughness, strength, and decisiveness are preferred (Huddy & Terkildsen, 1993a; Rosenwasser & Dean, 1989), particularly "in the post-September 11th era" (Lawless, 2004). Not surprisingly, these masculine traits are associated most frequently with male candidates (Lawless, 2004; Rosenwasser & Seale, 1988) and become increasingly important at higher levels of office (Huddy & Terkildsen, 1993b; Rosenwasser & Dean, 1989), such as the presidency (Huddy & Terkildsen, 1993b; Lawless, 2004; Rosenwasser & Dean, 1989; Rosenwasser & Seale, 1988). In fact, some research finds a "bias against candidates who lack masculine traits" (Huddy & Terkildsen, 1993b, p. 520).

In turn, while stereotypically feminine traits, such as compassion, honesty, and morality, most commonly are associated with female candidates (Huddy & Terkildsen, 1993a; Lawless, 2004; Rosenwasser & Seale, 1988), the possession of these traits is not particularly advantageous, even at local levels of office (Huddy & Terkildsen, 1993b). Research also confirms that, as the level of office increases, the likelihood of voting for a female candidate decreases (Dolan, 1997). A nationwide poll in 2000 further substantiated negative perceptions of women as presidential material, finding that a third of respondents believed that women are less qualified than men to be President of the United States (Deloitte & Touche, 2000). Not only are female candidates perceived as less able and less experienced, but voters also believe that male candidates are more likely to share their views (Riggle, Miller, Shields, &Johnson, 1997). Even when backgrounds are comparable, female candidates are perceived as less likely to win (Leeper, 1991; Rosenwasser & Dean, 1989).

When policy issues are considered, male candidates again have the advantage. For instance, male candidates are more likely to be considered strong on instrumental issues like taxes and defense (Alexander & Andersen, 1993; Huddy & Terkildsen, 1993a; Lawless, 2004; Rosenwasser & Dean, 1989; Rosenwasser & Seale, 1988), while female candidates are perceived as stronger on education and health care (Alexander & Andersen, 1993; Huddy & Terkildsen, 1993a; Rosenwasser & Dean, 1989; Rosenwasser & Seale, 1988). Yet, "feminine" issues-such as education and health care-are thought to be the least important among presidential responsibilities (Rosenwasser & Seale, 1988). Although voters acknowledge that traditionally feminine traits, such as compassion, are appropriate in a president (Alexander & Andersen, 1993), women do not necessarily benefit from gender-congruent stereotyping (Huddy & Terkildsen, 1993b). Instead, regardless of gender, possession of instrumental traits elicits more support at all levels of office; particularly for women, possession of gender-congruent traits is not perceived as a benefit in attaining political office.

Relevant to the present study, Dolan (2004) found that the gender and partisan cues for female Republican candidates did not predict either candidate evaluations or issue mentions. In other words, female Republican House candidates were not judged as being more liberal or conservative than male Republican House candidates. Dolan concluded that, in the case of female Republican candidates, the cues of candidate gender and partisan affiliation conflict, giving rise to stereotyping based more on partisanship. Yet, when candidate status (incumbent or challenger) is considered, gender stereotyping emerges within party. Incumbent female Republicans were perceived to be less conservative than male Republican candidates. Implications of this within-party stereotyping are illustrated by McDermott (1997), who found that, when party is held constant, female candidates are viewed as more liberal than men and, further, that women do not succeed as well among conservatives. Additionally, Kenski & Falk (2004) determined that Republicans and conservatives were more likely to trust a man to handle what they deemed to be the most important issues, which suggests that female presidential candidates may "have to work harder to convince Republicans and conservatives of their acceptability and viability" (p. 74). Falk & Kenski (2006) replicated this finding, which strongly suggests that a female Republican candidate will face perhaps her greatest challenge in her own party's primary (King & Matland, 2003).

These findings confirm that female candidates--especially candidates for higher office, such as the presidency--still must overcome...