{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021720243266724587, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010425716768027803, 'mean_word_length': 5.435754189944134, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Gender Gap in Presidential Evaluations: Assessments of Clinton's Performance in 1996

The purpose of this paper is to explain the differences between women's and men's evaluations of President Clinton in 1996. By testing the impact of a wide array of potential influences-social characteristics, core beliefs and values, partisan and ideological orientations, assessment of the country's current conditions and specific policy preferences-this analysis attempts to provide a comprehensive account of the largest gender gap in approval levels ever recorded among voters surveyed by the National Election Studies (NES). The results indicate that beliefs about the proper role of the federal government make, by far, the most powerful contribution toward the explanation of the gender gap, accounting for at least half of its observed size. Attitudes toward gay rights emerge as the second most important influence on gender differences in Clinton's evaluations. On the other hand, attitudes toward defense spending, the key factor underlying the approval gap during the early Reagan years, and women's issues are of virtually no consequence in 1996.