{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019688269073010665, 'fraction_numerical': 0.020508613617719443, 'mean_word_length': 6.0520231213872835, '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}}
Partisan patterns in presidential campaign speeches, 1948–2000

This article investigates partisan language and its role in American political campaigns by addressing two fundamental questions: Can the differences between Democratic and Republican presidential candidates be reliably identified by a careful inspection of their speeches? and Have their speeches changed over time? In answering these questions, over 2,000 speech segments delivered by Democratic and Republican candidates over the past 14 elections (1948–2000) are examined. The data show that (1) Democratic candidates are more likely than Republicans to discuss campaign actors and to use nouns to rhetorically bring their coalitions together, (2) Republican candidates are more likely than Democrats to focus on ideals and employ a more unified, direct approach, and (3) these partisan patterns have decreased somewhat over the years in presidential campaign speeches. While this analysis provides some support for the contention that presidential campaign discourse is becoming increasingly candidate‐centered, it also reveals that major party candidates continue to adhere to some partisan rhetorical patterns in the presidential selection process.