While terrorism on American soil tops the news, voters will support the presidential candidate who projects the strongest aura of leadership, says a political scientist who wrote a book on the subject.
The catch with that scenario is that neither Donald Trump nor Hillary Clinton can claim the definitive advantage. Both have strengths and weaknesses around the issue of leadership.
鈥淲hen terrorism is salient, the public has biases toward masculine aggressive leadership, experience in national security and incumbency,鈥� said , professor of political science at 菠萝视频 University and author (with Jennifer L. Merolla) of . 鈥淓ach candidate has some characteristics that should be viewed favorably by the public and others that might be shortcomings.鈥�
Clinton is emphasizing her experience and leadership qualities, while Trump projects a 鈥渕asculine aggressive posture,鈥� Zechmeister said.
鈥淓ach has been working to present the other candidate as weak, ineffective or even dangerous to national security,鈥� she said.
Other issues 鈥� the economy, health care, education 鈥� could at any time become more important to the public, depending on the timing of any further terrorist attacks.
鈥淚t is certainly the case that other issues are important to the U.S. public, and the public鈥檚 attention to terrorist threats increases and decreases in step with media reports about plots and attacks,鈥� Zechmeister said. 鈥淕iven that terrorism has been a persistent, though not necessarily constant, issue in the campaign to date, it will remain an important part of the conversation.鈥�