I watched the ads from both the Republic and Democratic runnings for the 1956 election (Eisenhower V Stevenson). The differences between the entire ad campaigns were interesting to see. The Democratic campaign was centered around fear-based tactics and critiquing Eisenhower’s previous term. The Republican approach highlighted a series of Americans and allowing them to talk about why they were voting for Ike. This approach is important for two reasons, 1. the American people were speaking for themselves, this celebrated unity and “the people” ideals, and 2. women were voting, so the marketing approach was focused on women, as individuals.
Lots of studies say Eisenhower’s approach to campaign TO women aided in his victory. The Republicans were able to exploit the gender ideology of the mid-1950s while the Democrats were trying to campaign to everyone, creating too broad of a marketing strategy. My personal favorite ad was titled “Women Voters.” It begins with the statistic: “This year there are fifty-four million women eligible to vote – two and a half million more women than men, enough to decide the whole election.” This clearly explains Eisnhower’s marketing approach, female voters could determine the election results! The speaker continues on and says “because they believe he represents their best hope of achieving these things, the women of America are making their choice for president Dwight D. Eisenhower.” That line is so important, the women of America are a separate group in this election when for so long women did not vote, and when they started to, they followed their husband’s vote. This differentiation of women as a separate voting demographic was a genius marketing strategy. This highlights how crucial women were to this election and that they deserve special attention during campaigning.
When watching the ad you will see a series of 10 women speak about why they chose to vote for Ike, they mention security and minimum wage laws, but most of all, they speak about his character. Words like sincerity, honesty, God-fearing, and respectable. It speaks to the truth of the time: women votes during those years were based on more personal and subjective judgments of the candidates. I was reading up on the marketing strategies of this election and found two interesting quotes. From Republican Bertha Adkins: “There is no question that the woman’s point of view is more subjective and personal. Women are more concerned about the honesty and integrity of the candidate, and they often react emotionally to his personality. If they don’t like him, they may very well stay home on election day.” And from the Democratic side, Katie Louchheim believed, “There just isn’t any such thing as a women’s vote, or any appeal that is more effective for women than for men. The appeal of a candidate’s personality is just as strong for men as for women, and women are interested in all issues.” Here you have two contrasting views, and when understood in the context of the time (because obviously things have changed greatly and I would say Louchheim’s statement is true today), one can see the reason the Republican’s took that specific marketing approach, and they ended up winning; so although the marketing strategy wouldn’t work today, it was genius for this election year.
Quotes from: Brown, Nona “Women’s Vote: The Bigger Half?”, New York Times October 21, 1956, 2.
I didn’t know that Eisenhower used an ad campaign with all women during the 1956 election. I thought all of the women in the campaign ad used concrete information about why they chose ‘Ike’ for president. However, it was quite an ironic situation as women were told about their political power on TV , but female interviewees were mostly shown to be housewives. This ad is symbolic of the role of women in society during the mid-20th century.
I thought it was fascinating to watch this ad and look at this approach to marketing/persuading voters. I thought it was really interesting how the women discussed how their interests were focused on the betterment of their families, not their betterment of them as individuals. However, despite focusing on family values, I still think it is really interesting to see how Eisenhower wanted women’s voices and concerns to be heard, even if they were in this way.
I completely missed this ad. It is so interesting and genius that Eisenhour would utilize the voices of 10 white woman and for them to emphasize points that would touch the hearts and minds of the white female viewers who would then be influenced to vote for Ike as well. Like you said a majority of them emphasized his character traits which was effective as you mentioned that the women’s “point of view is more subjective and personal”. Mentioning that the women vote alone could decide the election is also a very intelligent approach to getting women to go out and vote because it is either 1) empowering or 2) provokes their husbands to make sure they send their wives to vote for their desired candidate.