While there has been a growth in the number of published studies about how candidates for the U.S. House and Senate use Twitter, candidates for president have been largely ignored. In this article, we examine the way the two 2016 presidential candidates communicated on Twitter. Using a content analysis of all tweets sent from Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump’s accounts from July 1 to Election Day, we explore whether the two candidates used this social network in the same ways, stressed similar policy issues, and were equally likely to “go negative” online.
AdamsA.McCorkindaleT. (2013). Dialogue and transparency: A content analysis of how the 2012 presidential candidates used Twitter. Public Relations Review, 39, 357–359.
BrattonK. A. (2002). The effect of legislative diversity on agenda setting: Evidence from six state legislatures. American Politics Research, 30, 115–142.
4.
ClaytonD. M. (2010). The presidential campaign of Barack Obama: A critical analysis of a racially transcendent strategy. New York, NY: Routledge.
5.
ConwayB. A.KenskiK.WangD. (2013). Twitter use by presidential primary candidates during the 2012 campaign. American Behavioral Scientist, 57, 1596–1610.
6.
DodsonD. L. (1991). Reshaping the agenda: Women in state legislatures. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for the American Woman and Politics.
7.
EvansH. K. (2016). Do women only talk about “female issues”? Gender and issue discussion on Twitter. Online Information Review, 40, 660–672.
8.
EvansH. K.ClarkJ. H. (2016). “You tweet like a girl!”: How female candidates campaign on Twitter. American Politics Research, 44, 325–352.
9.
EvansH. K.CordovaV.SipoleS. (2014). Twitter style: An analysis of how house candidates used twitter in their 2012 campaigns. PS: Political Science and Politics, 47, 454–462.
10.
EvansH. K.OvalleJ.GreenS. (2016). Rockin robins: Do congresswomen rule the roost in the Twittersphere?Journal of the Association of Information Science and Technology, 67, 268–275.
GainousJ.WagnerK. M.HolmanM. R. (2017). I am woman, hear me tweet! Gender differences in Twitter use among congressional candidates. Journal of Women, Politics, and Policy, 1–26.
13.
JohnsonJ. (2012). Twitter bites and Romney: Examining the rhetorical situation of the 2012 presidential election in 140 characters. Journal of Contemporary Rhetoric, 2, 54–64.
KreissD. (2014). Seizing the moment: The presidential campaigns’ use of Twitter during the 2012 electoral cycle. New Media & Society, 18(8): 1473–1490.
17.
LeeJ.LimY. (2016). Gendered campaign tweets: The cases of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Public Relations Review, 42, 849–855.
ReingoldB. (2000). Representing women: Sex, gender, and legislative behavior in Arizona and California. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Pres.
Stromer-GalleyJ. (2014). Presidential campaigning in the internet age. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
22.
SwersM. (2002). The difference women make: The policy impact of women in congress. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
23.
ThomasS. (1991). The impact of women on state legislative policies. Journal of Politics, 53, 958–976.
24.
ThomasS. (1994). How women legislate. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
25.
WilliamsC. B.GirishG. J. (2008). What is a social network worth? Facebook and vote share in the 2008 presidential primaries. Presented at the 2008 American Political Science Association Annual Meeting, Boston, MA.
26.
WolbrechtC. (2000). The politics of women’s rights: Parties, positions, and change. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
