Stereotypical assumptions about minority candidates serving those who identify most closely with their own identity have led to heightened scrutiny of women and Black candidates’ language. Using race-gendered language on the campaign trail can undermine a candidate’s viability, as skepticism of racial and gendered language is rooted in the belief that minority candidates may be “too narrow” in their concerns. Against this backdrop, this article explores the campaign rhetoric of three mayors: Keisha Lance Bottoms of Atlanta, Lori Lightfoot of Chicago, and Muriel Bowser of Washington, DC. Analyzing 62 mayoral debates using NVivo, I find that Black women candidates leverage their lived experiences, rooted in their racial and gendered identity, more than their race and gendered counterparts when advocating for their policy preferences. This work produces key insights into identity and campaign rhetoric utilized by Black women politicians.

中文翻译：

---

讲故事：黑人女政治家及其对经验修辞的运用

关于少数族裔候选人服务于那些最认同自己身份的人的陈规定型假设导致了对女性和黑人候选人语言的更严格审查。在竞选活动中使用种族性别语言可能会削弱候选人的生存能力，因为对种族和性别语言的怀疑源于认为少数族裔候选人的关注点可能“过于狭隘”。在此背景下，本文探讨了三位市长的竞选言论：亚特兰大的 Keisha Lance Bottoms、芝加哥的 Lori Lightfoot 和华盛顿特区的 Muriel Bowser。使用 NVivo 分析了 62 场市长辩论，我发现黑人女性候选人在倡导自己的政策偏好时，比她们的种族和性别同行更多地利用她们的生活经历，植根于她们的种族和性别认同。