The international community was startled by the 2016 US presidential election as it appeared disruptive for international order. The Republican candidate, Donald Trump, who was elected as President...Show moreThe international community was startled by the 2016 US presidential election as it appeared disruptive for international order. The Republican candidate, Donald Trump, who was elected as President, surprised friend and foe with his explicit rhetoric regarding the role of the US in world politics. The foreign policy ideas of the Democratic candidate, Hilary Clinton, are generally perceive as more in line with the status quo. Consequently, this research aims to analyze how the concept of American exceptionalism was framed to legitimization these foreign policies suggestions. The American exceptionalism narrative is in academia generally understood as an ongoing narrative in US identity that frames foreign policy discourse. Therefore, analyzing how the candidates frame this concept, allows to gain understanding in the development of this discourse. The exact research question this study addresses is: How was American exceptionalism framed differently by candidates to legitimize ideas of US foreign policy in the 2016 presidential campaign discourse? This study performs a quantitative discourse analysis of campaigns speeches by Trump and Clinton from the 2016 presidential election. In total 100 official speeches are studied, 50 from Trump’s campaign and 50 from Clinton’s campaign, ranging from three different time periods in the election. The concept of American exceptionalism is operationalized on two levels. The primary level concentrates on US identity in general and eventually entailed two frames: Superior (better) and Singular (unique). The secondary level emphasizes the role of the US in world politics and ultimately encompassed also two frames: Exemplarism (exemplar) and Expansionism (leader). Based on this operationalization, the findings signify that Trump refers more to the concept of American exceptionalism, and also increasingly during the election, but at the same time undermines it many times more than Clinton. How the candidates frame the concept to discuss particular foreign policy topics is surprisingly similar, as both utilizes the Expansionism frame for the topic of terrorism while generally preferring the Exemplarism frame for other foreign policy areas. All in all, Trump appears more explicit and outspoken in how he frames the concept, yet not per se very distinct compared to the framing by Clinton. This study therefore indicates homogeneity in the belief in American exceptionalism and how it is framed to legitimize foreign policy. Based on these findings limitations and avenues for future research are discussed.Show less
