SAN ANTONIO – When it comes to presidential campaigns, no one ever said they would be nice.
But this unusual election year has been unusually nasty. The candidates have been on the campaign trail attacking the other, and the three presidential debates have proven to be more childlike than actual discussion on policy.
Recommended Videos
Their behavior has been one of the major topics of discussion.
Republican nominee Donald Trump himself suggested there’s no problem with the size of his genitalia after primary contestant Marco Rubio scoffed at the size of his hands. He’s been scrutinized for calling Mexicans rapists, saying Sen. John McCain is not a war hero because he was captured, and going after Fox host Megyn Kelly after the first presidential debate by saying, “You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever.”
Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton’s “oops” moment came when she called Trump supporters “a basket of deplorables” and has struggled to get out of the pit on issues like the email scandal while she was secretary of state. Her health had been called into question, and she’s under fire for her stance on legalizing late-term abortions.
Some incivility is good, according to UTSA Assistant Professor of Political Science Bryan Gervais, because it motivates people to vote. He said the rhetoric and mean speech on the campaign trail, though, is trouncing on actual policy discussions. And the candidates are doubling down with more intense smears at each rally.
“Along with enthusiasm, anger is the most important emotion in terms of getting people out to the polls,” Gervais said.
Martez Florence, a San Antonio voter, said both Trump and Clinton have acted like kids and turned the Oval Office into something it’s not.
“You got Donald Trump blasting people on Twitter. Hillary Clinton, she’s got all types of stuff going on with her emails,” he said. “They’re just acting out. I wouldn't want them to represent me because there’s no telling what they’re going to do at a U.N. meeting!”
The debates
The three presidential debates certainly fed the 24-hour news cycle and played out on late night talk and variety shows. Whether they were successful in communicating or relating with voters is another matter.
Gervais said debates don’t usually have a long-term impact. They may incite short-term changes, he said. The candidates will generally encounter a brief rise or dip in polls, but voters tend to look at a candidate’s overall message and not a debate-night showdown.
The showdowns have been tense, nonetheless.
At the second debate, a town-hall style forum, Clinton posed this thought to the audience:
"It's just a good thing that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump is not in charge of the law in our country,” she said.
Quick to take a jab back at Clinton, Trump responded, "Because you'd be in jail.”
What Trump needs to do
Trump is in a peculiar position.
If anything, his behavior throughout the campaign might be leading him to continue the same pattern.
Gervais said Trump needs to change minds in order to win -- but not with anger. He said Trump would be better served by inducing anxiety to get people to reconsider their vote.
“This approach to throwing out red meat and very uncivil rhetoric, especially during the debates, doesn’t do him any favors,” Gervais said.
For a candidate who is losing, Gervais said that person would usually be more civil to entice voters. It’s odd, Gervais said, for a candidate in Trump’s position to keep doing what he’s doing.
It does seem to be working, and this is anything but an ordinary election year.
What Clinton needs to do
On the other hand, for a candidate who is winning, like Clinton, even though it’s by a thin margin at this point, Gervais the strategy would be to induce enthusiasm, or even anger.
“They set the level of discourse,” Gervais said. “The more uncivil they are, the public sort of follow them and the more civil they are, discourse tends to follow to an extent.”
What each candidate is doing, in essence, is the opposite of what a winning or losing candidate would be doing at this point. Time will tell if the strategies will work for Trump or Clinton.
The conversation becomes even more complex, however, because much of the discussion surrounding the election and campaigns takes place online.
Gervais said people are emboldened by anonymity, or the false sense of it, and therefore raise the level of hostile speech.
What happens next?
In all other elections, a peaceful transfer of power takes place for each new administration. Gervais said he can’t rule out the possibility that violence will be the result of the election.
If history is any sort of guide in this raucous election year, the rhetoric may be smoldering after Nov. 8. Many believe everyday Americans will simply want Washington to do what’s best for them and their families, no matter who is in the White House.