Posted on 03/06/2017 9:07:44 PM PST by RegulatorCountry
After watching the second televised debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in October 2016—a battle between the first female candidate nominated by a major party and an opponent who’d just been caught on tape bragging about sexually assaulting women—Maria Guadalupe, an associate professor of economics and political science at INSEAD, had an idea. Millions had tuned in to watch a man face off against a woman for the first set of co-ed presidential debates in American history. But how would their perceptions change, she wondered, if the genders of the candidates were switched? She pictured an actress playing Trump, replicating his words, gestures, body language, and tone verbatim, while an actor took on Clinton’s role in the same way. What would the experiment reveal about male and female communication styles, and the differing standards by which we unconsciously judge them?
(Excerpt) Read more at nyu.edu ...
They've been trained to respond positively to a woman, no matter what, and were upset to be agreeing with "Trump" as a female.
What a bunch of screwed up ideologues.
ibtz
Either way Donald Trump is better looking.
Hillary’s big negative was she was corrupt AF and everyone knew it. There would be no accountability or investigations into her administration.
Dress her up however you want, that fact remains.
If you’re not joking why don’t you zot your own ignorant self?
People who didn’t or wouldn’t understand that Hillary was corrupt found themselves agreeing with the female “Trump” and disliking the male “Hillary,” which was the exact opposite of what the NYU faculty had hoped to demonstrate. It completely upended their whole gender bias narrative.
Enter a hologram of the late Anthony Quinn, alone on the stage, dressed in dirty peasant clothes, singing...What if I were a rich man...ya, da- da- da- da- da?
More then that they are upset that when they stripped the “battle of the sexes” stupidity out of it they found they agreed with Trump. They didn’t like agreeing with him, but they did agree.
Don’t be so harsh. Yours is a rather useless post, would you not agree?
Yep, what they thought was wild flailing from Donald Trump suddenly turned into “a very precise technique” coming from a female repeating what he said verbatim along with tone, gestures and mannerisms.
Makes it pretty clear why they attack female Republicans so relentlessly and viciously, doesn’t it? They know their bot army has been conditioned to respond positively to women, period, so they’ve got to destroy them before that can happen.
No, it’s not useless to people who actually read the article in question. You obviously did not.
How would you like to be on the receiving end of an “IBTZ” from some dunce who didn’t read the article? Oh, wait a minute ...
The Left simply cannot come to terms with their running an old, corrupt, banshee-voiced person (forget “woman” — she hardly displayed that in the classic sense) as their Presidential candidate. She was a TERRIBLE candidate, with absolutely nothing to recommend her but her betrayal by a husband who was looking for fun with an ACTUAL woman.
These crazed individuals who can’t even IMAGINE that Americans might prefer to elect one of the most successful businessmen of both the 20th and 21st centuries to fix the nation’s disastrously horrible economy are beyond reason, logic or help.
By tradition on FR, we often comment and reach conclusions based on the excerpt alone. In this case, I strongly recommend reading the whole article. It looks like it was done honestly, and it reaches useful conclusions: Hillary lost because of who she is and how she acts, not because she’s a woman.
They saw how ridiculous Hillary was, when played back to them by a man. They couldn’t see it coming from a female. Sounds as if there were face palms all over the audience, quite hilarious really.
Thanks for actually reading the article, by the way.
Thank you.
Hillary is widely HATED by many because of her reign of terror as the first CO-PRESIDENT....it has nothing to do with her gender. It has everything to do with her cold heart, extreme leftist political views & history of completely unethical evil behavior.
It would be interesting to have them read the exact same article with a different autobiography attached to see how they react.
That would be a “no” on both counts. Still, don’t take it personally; a worthless post nevertheless.
Opinions are like @holes, everybody’s got one and they all stink.
Thank you for yours, such as it is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.