Jasper McElrath

ENGL398L
12/12/14
Journal Article

How Obama Won and Clinton Lost

The experiences of Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Barack Obama in the
2008 presidential primaries raised important questions regarding how racial and gender
stereotypes can impact voters perceptions of political candidates. With a black man and a
white woman both frontrunners for the Democratic presidential nomination for the first
time in history, this election posed voters with the stark and ironic - choice between two
groups who have historically been politically and constitutionally discriminated and
oppressed, with the success of one gained at the cost of the other.
Obama and Clinton developed distinct demographic bases of support, this article
is going to focus the demographic divides [gaps] in the 2008 democratic primary.
Gapology is the study of variation between said demographic groups or divides.
Gapology is primarily concerned with better understanding how Americans conceptualize
the political atmosphere. The gapology of the race between Obama and Clinton is
especially significant because of the distinctness of the candidates bases of support
despite the lack of major ideological differences between the candidates. The goal is to
gain a better understanding of how Barack Obama was able to pull off one of the bigger
upsets in American political history.

In his article Black and White Unite? The Clinton-Obama Campaigns in

Historical Perspective, Michael Dunne presents the racial gap as the largest determinate
in the election. Though I agree that the racial gap was- and generally is- the largest gap, it
was not the most significant or surprising. I contend that the most influential gap in
determining the election was the gender gap between candidates.
Obama received a majority of the minority vote, whereas Clinton barely retained
the majority of the female vote why? The 2008 Democratic presidential primary
between Clinton and Obama was greatly influenced by a gender gap between candidates
that was predicated by the established beliefs and values of the female voters, and
perpetuated by Obamas attractiveness as a candidate.
Dunne also presented that Clinton vehemently apposed and declined to be
portrayed as the candidate of women; Obama acknowledged the fact he was a black
candidate, but also denied to be portrayed as the candidate of African Americans. (Dunne
354) Obviously both candidates said this to not alienate a specific voter demographic, but
I also believe Obamas campaign knew the importance of securing the female vote.
When the race began, Clinton was 30-points ahead over any rival in the
Democratic primary. She had outraised everyone at that point by more than a 2:1 margin.
She had the backing of the majority of the Democratic establishment. She had the
backing of her husband, popular-former President Bill Clinton. Clinton was the favorite,
and she was expected to easily secure the nomination. In her article Is there a Gender
Affinity Effect in American Politics? from Political Research Quarterly, Kathleen
Dolan explains that the phenomenon of gender affinity, the assumption that a female
voter is predisposed to support a female candidate, should be all but expected in the

political environment for three reasons. First, women are more likely to support a female
candidate due to demographic identification, identifying with someone on the basis of a
shared sex. Second, women often choose to endorse female candidates because they
yearn for descriptive representation in government. Lastly, she presents the concept of
party identification; women in the United States are much more likely to identify as
Democrat rather than Republican. (Dolan 79-80) Dolan also mentioned the desire for
representation concerning specific [liberal] issues, like sex crimes, childrens advocacy
and abortion, as another viable reason for women to be predisposed to voting for a female
candidate.
As mentioned above, the outcome of the election was predicated on the female
voters established beliefs and values concerning the candidates. Clinton was widely
considered too bossy and too brash. Obama fostered a sense of community and hope.
Steven Karau and Alice Eaglys article, Role congruity theory of prejudice toward
female leaders, introduces that prejudices against women in leadership positions exists
because the established stereotypes of women and of political leaders are not congruent
with one another. The female gender role is stereotypically characterized by communal
qualities, like kindness, sympathy and nurturing. Whereas, a leadership role is
characterized by negatively perceived qualities, like aggression, ambition, dominance and
power all traits commonly associated with masculinity. (Karau and Eagly 581) The
caveat, however, is that women need traits like ambition, drive and aggression to be
respected and taken seriously as politicians. Unfortunately, the traits necessary for a
political career are negatively perceived in women so they are construed as bossy and
abrasive. Two examples of role congruity theory manifesting itself in their race are: first,

in the last debate before the New Hampshire primary, the moderator asked Clinton
whether she had the personal appeal to best her very likeable opponent, Obama
interjected with, "You're likable enough, Hillary." His backhanded compliment depicts
even his established and stereotypical notion of female gender roles. In the days after
the debate, Hilary was prompted about her apparent likeability, and she got emotional and
cried. These two events humanized her and she handedly won the New Hampshire
primary shortly after. Though initially Clintons emotions were seen as genuine passion,
it prompted the debate about the possibility of an emotional menopausing woman being
Commander in Chief. Similarly to the masculine qualities necessary in politics being
negatively perceived in regard to Clinton, her showing emotion and lightening up were
also negatively perceived. Because the prejudice held against women is based on gender
role stereotypes and expectations, it holds that the extent to which individuals endorse
traditional gender role attitudes will influence their support for a female president.
Congruent with the above information, The Price of Power: Power Seeking and
Backlash Against Female Politicians, an article by T.G. Okimoto and V.L. Brescoll,
presents the concept that voters are less likely to vote for a female politician when she is
perceived as power seeking. Clinton clearly exhibited masculine characteristics, like
power seeking, strong agency and lack of communality, which violate her perceived
female gender role and penalized her in the election. (Okimoto and Brescoll 929) In her
response to President Bushs Iraq Stay the Course speech, Clinton displayed too much
agency. She used words like, I and my that emphasized her personal problem with
President Bush, rather than uniting the nation. Agency, like her response, is characterized

by masculine qualities, like self-protection, self-assertion and self-efficacy, all three of

which she displayed.
In her article Likeable? Effective Commander in Chief? Polling on Candidate
Traits in the Year of the Presidential Woman, Barbara Burell uses the four traits
commonly associated with being commander and chief, strong leader, honest and
trustworthy, and likeable, and compares Clinton to some of her male predecessors.
Referencing a 2007 Pew Poll, Burell explains Clintons rank on the toughness scale- 67
percent of respondents chose Clinton when asked who come to mind in regards to
toughness, compared to just 14 percent for Obama. She concluded that Clinton tested
better on masculine traits than on the so-called feminine ones, and that Obama beat
Clinton in terms of overall likeability. (Burell 747) However, Burell noted that traits, like
competency, strength and experience that are generally viewed as the biggest obstacles
for women proved not to be the disadvantage they once were. Like above, the problem is
rather combining those positive masculine traits with the more feminist traits to strike a
more androgynous balance.
The gender gap in the election was perpetuated by Obamas attractiveness as a
candidate. Obama was able to inspire the country, he had a vision for the countrys future
and fostered a sense of responsibility and unity in individuals. Obama far outpaced
Clinton in terms of being inspiring 70% tended to find him inspiring compared with
Clintons rating of 49%, with an equal percentage saying she was not inspiring. (Burell
751) Obama used his charm and charisma to woo voters. He cracked jokes, flashed
smiles and kissed babies; he was able to distinguish himself from the stern and sobering
looks of Clinton.

The difference between candidates was not ideological, they generally advocated
for the same issues of public polices. When Obama gave his response to President Bushs
Iraq Stay the Course speech, he engendered a sense of community. He used pronouns
like our and we to address and acknowledge the individual voters. Obama preached
that each vote made an importance difference, and that change need to be a joint effort.
Obamas campaign slogan, Change we can believe in, was a true testament to the sense
of community he hoped to establish.
Exploring The Gender Gap In Support For A Woman For President, an article
by Stefanie Simon and Crystal Hoyt, found that individuals vote for candidates who
endorse policies that correlate to the interests of their gender. For example, social issues,
advocating for peace and equality, education and healthcare are often thought to be
feminine issues; while issues like war, tax and budget cuts are considered masculine. In
2008, Obama campaigned and advocated for feminine [liberal] causes like: Equal Pay,
Health Care, Education Act and Gay Rights, proving his commitment to women.
Obama changed the way elections were run and would be run in the future. The
Obama campaign used social media and the power of technology to raise money and
engage with everyday people though social networks, email, text and online video.
Mybarackobama.com was a movement that made politics accessible for young people
and first-time voters online. It created an energy of involvement and participation that
established a sense of purpose and responsibility in the voters. Obama had approximately
5 million digital supporters on 15 different social networks. (Chang 16)
Obamas campaign slogan, Change we can believe in, was a true testament and
clear call to action to the sense of community he hoped to establish.

In addition to Obamas message of hope, change and advocacy for feminine issues, he
capitalized on the sheer quantity of first-time voters. The high media coverage of the
history primary election sparked higher voter turnout of usually underrepresented voters
(minorities, young people and women). According to the 2008 National Election Day
Exit Poll, of the 131,406,895 ballots counted, approximately 15,112,000 were first-time
voters. Data found that 68.7 percent of first-time voters cast their ballots for Obama. The
country is looking for something new and hip and next generational, and this is especially
true for voters under 30 demographic.
As presented in The Gapology of the Obama Vote in the 2008 Democratic
Presidential Primaries, Patrick Fisher conducts a study by analyzing the voting behavior
of 33 varying demographic support bases. He found that Obama received 46 percent of
the female vote and 53 percent of the male vote, and 83 percent of the black vote and 40
percent of the white vote. This evidence substantiates my rational for my topic.
Assuming the presented evidence is true, I can assert that Obama won the election
because he was a more democratic candidate. Obama did a better job at fusing the
varying demographic gaps, he appealed to feminine values and beliefs, and he fostered a
sense of community and hope. As Herbert (2006) correctly predicted, gender would be an
influential issue in the 2008 Democratic election:
When the crunch comes, the toughest issue for Clinton may be the one that so far has
been talked about least. If she runs, shell be handicapped by her gender. Anyone who
thinks it wont be difficult for a woman to get elected president of the United States
should go home, take a nap, wake up refreshed, and think again.

Works Cited
Secondary:
Burrell, Barbara. Likeable? Effective Commander in Chief? Polling on
Candidate Traits in the Year of the Presidential Woman. PS: Political Science and
Politics (2008): 747-752.
Chang, Victoria. "Obama and the Power of Social Media and Technology."The
European Business Review (2010): 16-21. Web.
Dolan, Kathleen. "Is There a Gender Affinity Effect in American
Politics?" Political Research Quarterly. 61.1 (2008): 79-89. Print.
Dunne, Michael. "Black And White Unite? The ClintonObama Campaigns In
Historical Perspective." Political Quarterly 79.3 (2008): 354-365. Academic Search
Premier. Web. 30 Oct. 2014.
Eagly, Alice H., and Steven J. Karau. "Role Congruity Theory of Prejudice toward
Female Leaders." Psychological Review 109.3 (2002): 573-98. Web.
Fisher, Patrick. "The Gapology of the Obama Vote in the 2008 Democratic
Presidential Primaries." Society 48.6 (2011): 502-09. Academic Search Premier. Web.
Herbert, B. (2006, May 19). Hillary can run, but can she win? New York Times, p.
A29.
Norrander, Barbara. The Intraparty Gender Gap: Differences between Male and
Female Voters in the 1980-200 Presidential Primaries. PS: Political Science and Politics
36, 2 (2003): 181-186.
Okimoto, T. G., and V. L. Brescoll. "The Price of Power: Power Seeking and
Backlash Against Female Politicians." Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 36.7
(2010): 923-36. Web.
Primary:
Hillary Clinton: "Statement by Hillary Clinton on President Bush's Address on
Iraq," April 10, 2008. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American
Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=96580.
Barack Obama: "Statement of Barack Obama on President Bush's Stay the Course
Iraq Strategy," April 10, 2008. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The
American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=91063.

"CBS Poll: Gender Matters More Than Race." CBSNews. CBS Interactive, 19
Mar. 2008. Web. 15 Nov. 2014.