“I Just Don't Think She Has a Presidential Look”: Sexism and Vote Choice in the 2016 Election*

Abstract

Objectives. This article examines the effect of both modern and traditional sexism on vote choice in the 2016 presidential election, and posits that they played a major role in explaining Hillary Clinton's defeat to Donald Trump. Methods. Data from the 2016 American National Election Study are analyzed using a logistic regression model. Results. Both modern and traditional sexism exerted a statistically significant effect on presidential vote choice in 2016. Indeed, its effect rivaled that of racial resentment and was only exceeded by partisanship. Conclusion. While a variety of factors may have cost Hillary Clinton the presidency in 2016, sexism needs to be addressed as one of those factors. More broadly, the findings of this article suggest that women candidates continue to face obstacles and are evaluated differently than men, especially when running for the most visible offices in American politics.

Sexism, racism, and nationalism: Factors associated with the 2016 U.S. presidential election results?

“…With regard to the 2016 election, several studies have found that greater endorsement of sexist beliefs about women was related to voting for Trump (e.g., [25,26]). In particular, Bock et al [8] found that undergraduate students who endorsed greater hostile sexism toward women (post-election) were more likely to have voted for Trump instead of Clinton.…”

“…With regard to the 2016 election, a few studies have found that greater endorsement of racism or less concern about racism were related to voting for Trump instead of Clinton (e.g., [26,9]). Given suggestions about the status threat of some White Americans and Trump's campaign rhetoric, Modern Racism may have contributed to the results of the 2016 presidential election.…”

“…For example, Dwyer et al's [41] work suggested that Modern Racism may be a stronger predictor than sexism toward women, but this may have been due to the 2008 U.S. presidential election including the first African American candidate. Three studies assessed both sexism toward women and racism predicting 2016 election voting intentions or behavior [26,9]. Both factors were significant predictors, and they were generally equivalent in strength.…”

Powerless Conservatives or Powerless Findings?

“…It is accurate to state that considerable research has found that sexism negatively influenced Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign (Cassese and Holman 2019;Knuckey 2019;Monteith and Hildebrand 2019;Schaffner, MacWilliams, and Nteta 2018;Valentino, Wayne, and Oceno 2018). However, these findings are not without critique; Zigerell (2019) claimed that current measurements of sexism measure bias only toward women and do not account for anti-man bias.…”

Left Unchecked: Political Hegemony in Political Science and the Flaws It Can Cause

“…Or consider research on gender attitudes and support for Donald Trump in Bracic, Israel-Trummel, and Shortle (2018); Cassese and Barnes (2018); Cassese and Holman (2019); Frasure-Yokley (2018); Knuckey (2018); Schaffner, MacWilliams, and Nteta (2018); Setzler and Yanus (2018); and Valentino, Wayne, and Oceno (2018). Each article had “sexism” in the title or abstract, but the gender-attitudes items did not measure attitudes disfavoring men.…”