Traditionally, campaigning abilities of candidates for any political positive are determined by their access to monetary resources. But now we live in a world where every individual has been giving a platform for their own voice through free social media. Voters want to learn about candidates through the platforms that they are already using everyday, so candidates spend a lot of time and strategy to produce content specifically for their followers.
You don’t need me to tell you how the 2016 presidential election process has been…. well, interesting. We have two very different candidates, and you can very clearly see their differences even just through their twitter pages. Content-and opinions- aside, you can grasp an idea of what type of candidate each person is through their pages just by how they (or their staff) post.
Let’s take a quick look at Trump’s page, with 11.1 million followers and a avatar picture to really brighten up your news feed, here are some of his most recent tweets:
A few things jump out at you right away. First thing is that this is clearly Trump tweeting these things personally. Second is that everything is aggressive, not even the content itself but also the use of capital letters and exclamation points is excessive.
Now lets take a peak at Clinton’s page, with 8.42 million followers and significantly less tweets, here are some of her most recent tweets:
Clinton’s page is almost the opposite of Trump’s. Her page is much concentrated around producing strategic content that is about the issues and promoting her plans for the presidency. All of these posts are very professionally made, easy to read, and informative. However it is blatantly obvious that every post was made by a member of her campaign staff, probably without her ever looking at any of them.
Part of the appeal of twitter is the access users get to the more personal thoughts of those they follow, whether that is their family and friends, their favorite musician, or their prospective choice for president. I think what draws voters to Trump is the authenticity of what he says, even if it is complete garbage. Clinton’s page gives off an almost robotic feel that doesn’t make a typical twitter user want to actually click on anything she posts about, even if it does relates more to them as a voter.
Each candidate is going for a completely different strategy with their twitter usage, but what they both have in common is that they are both failing to relate to potential voters in a positive way.