Kim Fridldn Kahn and Ann Gordon

At the Democratic National Convention in July 1992, women candidates
for the U.S. Senate appeared to sound a common theme. "I am a mother
and I am a grandmother, and I want to leave a legacy of clean water and
clean air. . . . I want . . . a nation that cares for its sick and elderly", Jean
Lloyd Jones told the crowd. Lynn Yeakel echoed her concerns, "I dream
of an America where no worker is denied a job, no child goes hungry or
homeless, no person is uneducated, and no one goes without health care".
Dianne Feinstein warned, "Today, America's greatest national security
threat is her domestic home front, and the battles are education; health
care, including AIDS and breast cancer; jobs; infrastructure; the budget
deficit; and the environment." These themes, together with a pro-choice
stance, were embraced by many women candidates running for the U.S.
Senate in 1992 ( Nicolosi and Ceballos 1992, 127 -29).

In addition to holding similar substantive concerns, women's cam-
paigns share other commonalities as well. Specifically, women candidates
often face questions about their effectiveness as campaigners ( Tolleson Rinehart
1994; Tolleson-Rinehart and Stanley 1994; Carroll 1994). For
example, in a recent analysis of the 1992 Illinois race for the U.S. Sen Jelen ate
( 1994) explained that Carol Moseley-Braun ". . . was regularly
characterized by the news media as having a superficial grasp of impor-
tant issues, and of 'sitting on her lead' by avoiding controversial state-
ments. . . . On a tactical level, Moseley-Braun's campaign was often de-
scribed as 'disorganized' and 'chaotic' " ( Jelen 1994, 147 ).

This study aims to see whether women campaign differently from
men substantively and strategically. With regard to substance, the 1992

-59-