by Hayden Kesterson

According to figures from the Center for American Women in Politics, women make up only 19.4% of the current US Congress and only four women ever have been Supreme Court justices, including the three currently presiding (“Current Numbers,” 2016). Considering that an estimated 50.8% of the United States’ population is women (“Quick Facts,” (n.d.)), these are startling statistics. The exclusion of women from public office does not only play out on grand, statistically measurable scales, however. It can be traced to specific instances of sexism enacted along different levels of interaction in public settings.

The current US presidential election between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump is an important milestone for women in politics, and, as such, is a visible arena for how such specific instances play out and contribute to the historical exclusion of women. An examination of an excerpt of their final debate informed by Fairclough (2014) shows how Trump’s use of language toward Clinton works to establish precedents that further marginalize women from the political sphere.

by Jessica Lewis

by Elyse O'Bannon

by Anonymous Student

by Michael Broughton

Every four years for the past half century, Americans have watched presidential candidates spar for political glory in televised presidential debates. Because of this history, viewers expect each debate to operate within a set of established conventions. The actors involved in presenting the debates -- the candidates, the moderator, the audience -- are expected to behave linguistically in ways consistent with Fairclough’s (1989) socially constructed “orders of discourse.” These are composed of conventions regarding verbal behaviors like turn-taking and word choice, as well as nonverbal elements like eye contact and gestures.