The political is personal: analyzing the presidential primary debate performances of Hillary Clinton and Michele Bachmann.

AuthorGreenwood, Molly M.

In 2012, Republican Michele Bachmann joined the long list of women who ran for U.S. President, but was only the third woman to debate in the party primaries. Four years prior, in 2008, Democrat Hillary Clinton spent a year in primary debates during her historic run for the presidency. To date, the United States has yet to elect a woman president, and subsequently there is currently no clear way to examine women's presidential rhetoric. However, in place of common rhetorical sites such as inaugural speeches and State of the Union addresses, women are able to perform presidentiality in a presidential primary campaign debate. Vancil and Pendell (1984) note that debate viewers may regard presidential debates as opportunities to "compare Presidential qualities of the candidates when they are under fire, in a situation which presumably simulates the pressured atmosphere of the White House" (p. 67). While issues are not unimportant, candidates must demonstrate good judgment on issues in addition to displaying wisdom, courage, leadership, honesty, and vision (Vancil & Pendell, 1984). In effect, the debate performance serves as the "job interview" for the office of United States President, as noted by Parry- Giles and Parry-Giles (1996), "Politics as an occupation serves as the primary institution used by the candidates to demonstrate their preparation for the presidency" (p. 343). The campaign debate is a prime job interview, as voters witness presidential contenders in a rare face- to-face setting.

Political rhetoric is laden with language, approaches, frames, and expectancies built on traditional political discourse that is dominated by male speakers and male-mediated norms (Bystrom, 2004). In light of overwhelming male political representation, Campbell's (1989) theory of feminine style was developed through analyses of historical rhetors responding to the unique constraints of an androcentric field. The traditional study of women's rhetoric has aimed to explicate rhetorical strategies used by feminist rhetors to gain access to traditional modes of political power, primarily suffrage (Dow & Tonn, 1993). Inspired by this framework, we examine presidential primary debate rhetoric. In effect, we argue that, in the primary debate setting, a traditional vision of the feminine or masculine styles does not exist. Instead, candidates appear to employ rhetorical strategies aligning with traditional visions of feminine and masculine style in order to respond to rhetorical constraints based both in gender and political expectations.

Although past women candidates Shirley Chisolm (in 1972) and Elizabeth Dole (in 1999) emerged prominently in their respective presidential races, it was not until 2004 that a female candidate, Carol Moseley-Braun, took the presidential primary debate stage. While presidential primary debates are not as gender diverse as non-presidential debates (e.g. Senate, gubernatorial), they have reached a new threshold in recent years, with the past four election cycles seeing women on the national debate stage. In light of these developments, scholars may now compare not only women candidates' rhetoric beyond the gubernatorial and Senate levels, but also compare rhetoric between women presidential candidates representing Democratic and Republican parties. As such, we respond to previous scholars' calls for more developed analysis on women in debate (Johnson, 2005; McKinney & Carlin, 2004) by comparing the performances of Michele Bachmann and Hillary Clinton. The following section will examine literature concerning the meaningful representation of women in debates, and the study's theoretical underpinnings. Finally, the research questions are presented prior to the full study and results.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Women Candidates in Presidential Primaries

Debating in presidential primaries is the closest women have come, to date, to performing presidentiality. Within these debates, women may face greater challenges relative to male candidates, given the prevalence of frames that place them outside the realm of presidentiality (Sheeler & Anderson, 2013). Presidential rhetorical styles, including sports and war metaphors that reinforce a heroic masculinity and rugged male individualism, carry into political language and can rhetorically exclude women from political power by reinforcing patriarchal values and upholding white masculine hegemony in U.S. policy (Jansen & Sabo, 1994; Sheeler & Anderson, 2013). As women gain prominence as presidential contenders, media and cultural accounts often assume that opportunity for women has exploded, thus confirming the belief that feminism has triumphed in the public sphere (Dow, 1996; McRobbie, 2007). One site for a seeming triumph is the presidential primary debate, where women participated in 2004, 2008, and 2012. While the presence of women on the debate stage is admirable, the scene remains male-dominated; women's entry serves as merely the foundation of an equitable space.

After Hillary Clinton's unprecedented transition from First Lady to U.S. Senator from New York (Scharrer, 2002), she emerged in 2007 as the frontrunner Democratic nominee for president. Republican candidate Michele Bachmann was largely an also-ran; however, after a strong debate performance on June 13, 2011, her support surged and she led the primary polls (Dinan, 2011). This lead did not last, and after debating for six months, Bachmann withdrew after a disappointing showing in the Iowa caucuses ("Women Presidential," 2012). In light of the small but significant increase in high profile women in presidential primary debates, we next examine female and male candidates' rhetorical strategies in the political realm.

Gendered Rhetorical Strategies

Gendered rhetorical strategies have frequently served as lenses through which to examine political rhetoric. Feminine style, proposed by Campbell (1973), was developed in response to challenges that females faced in entering the public sphere. Such rhetoric is personal in tone, addresses the audience as peers, invites audience participation, relies on personal experience, and identifies with the experience of the audience (Campbell, 1989). Feminine language strategizes how relationships can be established and maintained (Bate & Bowker, 1997; Tannen, 1990) and promotes feelings of understanding, equality, support, closeness, and inclusivity. To understand feminine rhetorical style in campaign discourse and its implications, it is important to investigate the messages developed and delivered by the candidates themselves (Johnson, 2005).

Some aspects of gendered rhetorical strategies present as essentialist and problematic, even in light of the positive changes to gender expectations and roles. The body of literature that divides communication into a binary of feminine and masculine categories has been contested, and questions surround the sustained relevance for contemporary political speakers. The use of these strategies in scholarship, and in practice, can not only reinforce but also promote gender stereotypes. Though the feminine style is perhaps imperfect as a method (Blankenship & Robson, 1995; Parry-Giles & Parry-Giles, 1996) it has the capacity to reveal underlying rhetorical tensions for female speakers on a national political stage. While there is obviously nothing inherently or naturally female about feminine style, Parry-Giles and Parry-Giles (1996) argue that sites of presidentiality may be associated with traditional notions of gender. Banwart and McKinney (2005) state, "The specific context and communicative dynamics of a campaign debate, characterized by face-to-face confrontation and direct verbal clash between candidates, may further enhance the expectation or need for traditionally 'masculine' communicative abilities" (p. 355). By evaluating potential rhetorical differences in the context of a primary campaign debate, we may uncover a variety of gendered communication variables that can merge-or clash (Banwart & McKinney, 2005). As women navigate these presidential sites in increasing frequency, the time is appropriate to compare their rhetorical strategies with those of male candidates.

While there are substantial issues related to the proliferation of feminine style in the political sphere, candidates benefit by employing it in presidential sites. One of the major constraints television places on politicians is the emphasis on public spheres over private ones. The mass media, Jamieson (1995) suggests, are fixated on differences between the private sphere and the public self of public figures. As a result, a comfort with expressing instead of camouflaging oneself is useful for a politician. Such comfort, according to Jamieson (1995), benefits women. Jamieson (1995) further postulates that a "feminine" style of televised political communication seemingly benefits female candidates because the emotionalism that historically stereotyped feminine communication works as a positive index of self-disclosure.

It is not surprising, then, that male candidates have used elements of feminine style to their advantage. The contemporary focus on image, and candidate reliance on television to communicate image, creates a forum for an "effeminate" style of political communication (Jamieson, 1988; Parry-Giles & Parry-Giles, 1996). Television invites a personal, self-disclosing style that draws public discourse out of a private self (Jamieson, 1988). Others go beyond identifying the utility of the "feminine" style and claim that a "feminine" style of discourse may actually represent the beginnings of a feminized politics-a potential shift in public discourse to a more feminist orientation. Blankenship and Robson (1995) maintain that a feminine style reflects a rhetor's "epistemic stances," and that male politicians can and do utilize feminine style to varying degrees. "Specifically, while most campaign rhetorics exhibit a 'feminine' style, they...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT