Social Media Reach
These days likes and followers are everything. So, we decided to take a closer look at both presidential candidate's online reach. For our casestudy, we will look at both Donald Trump's and Hillary Clinton's social media pages. There are two dimensions of social media following that you can consider here—the quantity and quality of an audience built by each candidate. Here are how the candidates’ social media profiles stack up:







Winner: Trump.

When it comes to quality, the best way to gauge the strength of an audience is through engagement rates, which measure likes, shares, comments, and other interactions social media users take with a given candidate’s online presence. The more engaged a user is, the more valuable he/she tends to be. In the case of political candidates, more engaged followers are more likely to vote, and more likely to be “brand evangelists” for their candidate – ie, convince others to vote for that candidate.

Recent data shows that Trump supporters are engaging at over twice the frequency of Clinton supporters. Overall, Trump is doing a better job at increasing his own visibility through the passion of his followers—his polarizing rhetoric and controversial statements are responsible for that.

There’s also the question of whether these engagements are “good” or “bad.” Trump may have a few extra million, exceptionally vocal followers, but how many of those followers are celebrating his posts versus criticizing them? This is a hard question to answer, but as a general rule, more visibility is a good thing in a presidential election—so here, Trump gets the win.