In many elections, candidates frame their appeals in gendered ways--they compete, for instance, over who is more "masculine." This is the case for male and female candidates alike. In the 2016 presidential election, however, the stark choice between the first major-party female candidate and a man who exhibited a persistent pattern of misogyny made the use of gender more prominent than in any previous election in the United States. Presidential campaigns often have an impact on downballot Congressional races, but the 2016 election provided a new opportunity to see the effects of misogyny. While much has been written about the 2016 election--and the shadow of 2016 clearly affected the pool of candidates in the 2018 midterms--this book looks at how the Trump and Clinton campaigns actually changed the behavior of more conventional candidates for Congress in 2016 and 2018. Over the past decade, those who study political parties have sought to understand changes in the relationship between groups and parties and how these changes have affected the ability of parties to develop coherent campaign strategies. The clear need for rapid adjustments in party strategy in the 2016 election provides an ideal means of testing whether today's political parties are more able or less able to respond to unexpected events. This book argues that Donald Trump's candidacy radically altered the nature of the 2016 congressional campaigns in two ways. First, it changed the issues of contention in many of these races. Trump's provocative calls for building a wall along the Mexican border and temporarily prohibiting immigration from Muslim countries inserted issues of race and ethnicity into elections and forced candidates to respond to his proposals. Most consequentially, however, Trump's attacks on women--including television personalities, politicians, and, at times, private citizens--alienated numerous potential supporters and placed many of his supporters (and downballot Republican candidates in particular) on the defensive. Second, expectations that Trump would lose the election influenced how candidates for lower office campaigned and how willing they were to connect their fortunes to those of their party's nominee. The fact that Trump was expected to lose--and was expected to lose in large part because of his misogyny--caused both major parties to direct more of their resources toward congressional races, and led many Republican candidates, especially women, to distance themselves from Trump. This book explores how the Trump and Clinton campaigns used gender as a political weapon, and how the presidential race changed the ways in which House and Senate campaigns were waged in 2016 and 2018.

In many elections, candidates frame their appeals in gendered ways--they compete, for instance, over who is more "masculine." This is the case for male and female candidates alike. In the 2016 presidential election, however, the stark choice between the first major-party female candidate and a man who exhibited a persistent pattern of misogyny made the use of gender more prominent than in any previous election in the United States. Presidential campaigns often have an impact on downballot Congressional races, but the 2016 election provided a new opportunity to see the effects of misogyny. While much has been written about the 2016 election--and the shadow of 2016 clearly affected the pool of candidates in the 2018 midterms--this book looks at how the Trump and Clinton campaigns actually changed the behavior of more conventional candidates for Congress in 2016 and 2018. Over the past decade, those who study political parties have sought to understand changes in the relationship between groups and parties and how these changes have affected the ability of parties to develop coherent campaign strategies. The clear need for rapid adjustments in party strategy in the 2016 election provides an ideal means of testing whether today's political parties are more able or less able to respond to unexpected events. This book argues that Donald Trump's candidacy radically altered the nature of the 2016 congressional campaigns in two ways. First, it changed the issues of contention in many of these races. Trump's provocative calls for building a wall along the Mexican border and temporarily prohibiting immigration from Muslim countries inserted issues of race and ethnicity into elections and forced candidates to respond to his proposals. Most consequentially, however, Trump's attacks on women--including television personalities, politicians, and, at times, private citizens--alienated numerous potential supporters and placed many of his supporters (and downballot Republican candidates in particular) on the defensive. Second, expectations that Trump would lose the election influenced how candidates for lower office campaigned and how willing they were to connect their fortunes to those of their party's nominee. The fact that Trump was expected to lose--and was expected to lose in large part because of his misogyny--caused both major parties to direct more of their resources toward congressional races, and led many Republican candidates, especially women, to distance themselves from Trump. This book explores how the Trump and Clinton campaigns used gender as a political weapon, and how the presidential race changed the ways in which House and Senate campaigns were waged in 2016 and 2018.

In many elections, candidates frame their appeals in gendered ways - they compete, for instance, over who is more 'masculine.' In the 2016 presidential election, however, the choice between the first major-party female candidate and a man who exhibited a persistent pattern of misogyny made gender more prominent than in any previous election in the United States. This text explores how the Trump and Clinton campaigns used gender as a political weapon, and how the presidential race changed the ways in which House and Senate campaigns were waged in 2016 and 2018.

Cyberspace is no longer a mystery. It has become irrevocably intertwined with everyday life, facilitating everything from reading the news and paying the bills to ordering birthday presents. We are in the midst of a revolution in mass communication, and there now exists the technology for creating new forms of community, empowering citizens, and challenging existing power structures. But will such changes occur? In this fascinating book Michael Margolis and David Resnick ponder the effects of cyberspace on American Politics. Our political system tends to normalize political activity, and thus, the Internet's vast potential could be lost, rendering it just another purveyor of ignored information. This broad examination begins with a history of cyberspace and moves through discussions of parties, political interest groups, candidates, mass media, information dissemination, and commercial uses of the Internet. Politics as Usual offers an innovative and exciting look into previously ignored aspects of the Internet and American politics.

Like politics, journalism has been turned topsy-turvy by the presidency of Donald Trump. Covering Politics in the Age of Trump takes a wide-ranging view of the relationship between the forty-fifth president and the Fourth Estate. In concise, illuminating, and often personal essays, twenty-four top journalists address topics such as growing concerns about political bias and journalistic objectivity; increasing consternation about the media’s use of anonymous sources; the practices journalists employ to gain access to wary administration officials; and reporters’ efforts to improve journalism in an era of twenty-four-hour cable news. Contributors include: Mark Ballard, Peter Bhatia, Rebecca Buck, Carl Cannon, Jill Colvin, Charlie Cook, McKay Coppins, Mary C. Curtis, Paul Farhi, Quint Forgey, Major Garrett, Ginger Gibson, “Fin” Gomez, Jesse J. Holland, Clark Hoyt, Sarah Isgur, Mark Leibovich, Ashley Parker, Fernando Pizarro, Tom Rosenstiel, Frank Sesno, Alexis Simendinger, Steve Thomma, and Salena Zito. The Trump administration’s contentious relationship with the media has altered the public’s expectations regarding the news and national politics. In Covering Politics in the Age of Trump, top political reporters explore this dynamic, relaying stories from the campaign trail to the briefing room that illustrate the new challenges faced by journalists working in the age of “fake news.”

The stunning 2016 election and presidency of Donald Trump was decades in the making. Three trends since the 1960s created the conditions for his triumph. First, a growing popular discontent with government, long evident in public opinion, created a widespread distrust of established leaders and institutions. Second, America underwent the rise of “professional government.” Governing professionals are an elite built on merit through occupational accomplishment. They now dominate interest groups, the bureaucracy, courts, presidency, and Congress. Many government professionals perceive little need to mobilize the public in the way parties did in previous eras. This has furthered the sense of disconnect among the public and created a self-reinforcing chain. Third, political parties and governing institutions are now polarized into rival teams of ideological, partisan elites. The intense battles between these divergent teams often result in government gridlock. These conditions produce ripe opportunities for “outsider” candidates to mount popular movements against politics as usual. How did Donald Trump leverage his outsider status into a 2016 electoral victory? Four factors propelled him into the White House. First, Trump’s long career as a public celebrity gave him an identity and “brand” widely known to the public and which generated massive free media coverage as a candidate. Second, Trump and his campaign ably used social media to further amplify his message. Third, decades of polarized political elites, governmental professionalism and mounting popular discontent made an “outsider” message attractive to millions of voters in 2016. Fourth, Trump was blessed with a political opponent, Hillary Clinton, who represented the polarized and professional governing class that Trump rightly saw as an inviting target for his outsider message and demeanor. That is how Trump happened.

The presidency of Donald J. Trump is rather ordinary. Trump himself may be the most unusual, unorthodox and unconventional president the US has ever had. Yet, even with his extraordinary personality and approach to the job, his presidency is proving quite ordinary in its accomplishments and outcomes, both at home and abroad. Like most modern US presidents, the number and scope of Trump’s achievements are rather meager. Despite dramatic claims to a revolution in US politics, Trump simply has not achieved very much. Trump’s few policy achievements are also mostly mainstream Republican ones rather than the radical, anti-establishment, swamp-draining changes promised on the campaign trail. The populist insurgent who ran against Washington has followed a policy agenda largely in tune with conservative Republican traditions. The Ordinary Presidency of Donald J. Trump provides a detailed explanation for the discrepancy between Trump’s extraordinary approach and the relative mediocrity of his achievements. Ironically, it is precisely Trump’s extraordinariness as president that has helped render his presidency ordinary.