More handpicked essays just for you.
Rhetorical analysis of political speech
Examples of rhetoric in everyday life
Rhetorical analysis of political speech
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
American politics have long revolved around the Grand Old Party and the Democratic Party. Arguably every conflict can be drawn back to the exacerbation of these two discordant parties. Both entities refuse to approach middle ground because it would hinder the respective party’s prestige or disobey ideals held for the past two centuries. Being a noted Democratic advocate, forty second US president William Clinton speaks at the Democratic National Convention. Because he employs rhetorical strategies, such as antithesis and procatalepsis, the partiality in his speech not only extols the Democrat’s persona but also degrades the Republican’s image. One way he conveys this partiality is by using “we.” This is invented ethos and it gives comfort
to the audience. They know that Clinton will be there with them. He claims to “speak as a citizen.” This is an example of apophasis because he does not begin his speech with how the Republicans and Democrats are having a petty fight and how the audience needs to side with the Democrats in order for them to win; he shoves the conflict aside, hence denying it. Instead, he lowers his pedestal, lends out a hand and talks about common human interests, like union. Because he strikes the crowd’s appeal for union, peace and fighting terrorism, he is able to captivate their euphoric senses and channel them by associating those goals with the Democratic Party. This is also an example of procatalepsis. The crowd may or may not be aware of how competent the Democrats are so by starting out with common interests of a “united America” he makes sure everyone is on the same page as him. The persistent in his efforts to guide them to the Democrats is observed through his use of pathos, like when he says “we Democrats will bring the American people a positive campaign, arguing not who's good and who's bad, but what is the best way to build the safe, prosperous world our children deserve.” Since he has already appealed to a generic human desire of safety, he has succeeded in capturing his audience’s attention. It is after this that he brings out the long awaited quarrel between the Democrats and the Republicans. He starts this by saying “ Democrats want to build an America of shared responsibilities and shared opportunities and more global cooperation, acting alone only when we must.” By giving the Democrats a great first impression, he is able to imprint on his audience that this is the party for them. By juxtaposing the introduction of Republicans as people who “ think the role of government is to concentrate wealth and power in the hands of those who embrace their political, economic, and social views, leaving ordinary citizens to fend for themselves on matters like health care and retirement security,” the listener automatically develops a dislike for the Republicans and sees them as the “other” side. This is antithesis at its finest. By placing these two contrasting personas, Clinton is able to appeal to the audience’s pathos. Clinton also implements antanagoge when he says “ At first I thought I should send them a thank you note -- until I realized they were sending you the bill.” He mentions a benevolent action on his part as a compassionate, humble Democrat and then breaks of his sentence by emphasizing the realization that the Republicans are putting the audience at a disadvantage. This not only makes the Democrats look more significant but makes the Republicans look greedy. The break in his sentence creates this extra emphasis.
In closing, this book informs us on how the Republicans went crazy and Democrats became useless, and how it’s become a problem. The books unfolds the faults of the Republicans and Democrats “behind the scenes”, and made me more aware of the parties today.
The tone during the whole plot of in Brave New World changes when advancing throughout the plot, but it often contains a dark and satiric aspect. Since the novel was originally planned to be written as a satire, the tone is ironic and sarcastic. Huxley's sarcastic tone is most noticeable in the conversations between characters. For instance, when the director was educating the students about the past history, he states that "most facts about the past do sound incredible (Huxley 45)." Through the exaggeration of words in the statement of the director, Huxley's sarcastic tone obviously is portrayed. As a result of this, the satirical tone puts the mood to be carefree.
Media such as movies, video games and television, in general, are all created to support some form of social context. This helps with generating popularity because people are able to relate to the form of media. In Greg Smith’s book What Media Classes Really Want to Discuss, he describes 6 different representational strategies that justifies people’s way of thinking. The trope that I will be amplifying is the white savior tactic. In addition, I will connect this strategy to the movie The Blind Side. There are clear examples throughout the film where racism and low-income cultures exist in which the white family is there to help. The Tuohy family from the movie “The Blind Side” serves as the white savior for the progression of Michael
Throughout the course of this novel, Ishmael Beah keeps the readers on the edge of their seat by incorporating interchanging tones. At the beginning of the novel, the tone can be depicted as naïve, for Beah was unaware to what was actually occurring with the rebels. Eventually, the tone shifts to being very cynical and dark when he depicts the fighting he has endured both physically and mentally. However, the most game changing tone is towards the end of the novel in chapters nineteen and twenty. His tone can be understood as independent or prevailing. It can be portrayed as independent because Beah learns how to survive on his own and to take care of himself. At the same time, it is perceived as prevailing and uplifting because Beah was able to demonstrate that there is hope. Later in the novel, Beah travels to
Ann Richards’s keynote speech at the Democratic National Convention in 1988 was extremely interesting to watch. I believe her speech was intended to be focused on the American family and also the American farmers. These two areas seemed to be very important to Mrs. Richards and she made a point to discuss both.
In the book Into the Wild, Jon Krakauer wrote about Christopher McCandless, a nature lover in search for independence, in a mysterious and hopeful experience. Even though Krakauer tells us McCandless was going to die from the beginning, he still gave him a chance for survival. As a reader I wanted McCandless to survive. In Into the Wild, Krakauer gave McCandless a unique perspective. He was a smart and unique person that wanted to be completely free from society. Krakauer included comments from people that said McCandless was crazy, and his death was his own mistake. However, Krakauer is able to make him seem like a brave person. The connections between other hikers and himself helped in the explanation of McCandless’s rational actions. Krakauer is able to make McCandless look like a normal person, but unique from this generation. In order for Krakauer to make Christopher McCandless not look like a crazy person, but a special person, I will analyze the persuading style that Krakauer used in Into the Wild that made us believe McCandless was a regular young adult.
Despite there being hundreds of video game releases every year, most of these games are unoriginal and therefore unplayable. There are countless video game genres, but one of the most popular genres in the past few years have been the zombie games, also called survival games. I was thoroughly convinced that all the games in this genre were clichéd and overdone, until I played the video game The Last of Us. Even though it is a survival game, the focus is not on gruesome zombies or gratuitous violence, making it already vastly different from the others. Instead, the focus is on telling a story. Between the gorgeous graphics, serene music, and flawless acting, it already goes beyond being just another “zombie game,” but this isn’t even accounting
Fairlie, Henry. The Parties: Republicans and Democrats in This Century. New York: The New Republic Magazine, 1978.
In response to his alleged affair with Ms. Monica Lewinsky, who at the time was an intern at the White House, President Clinton took to a national broadcast to clear his name. In his testimony, Clinton begins with a formal and slightly apologetic tone, and then subtly shifts the blame from his actions to the nosiness of the American public, victimizing himself. There were four different tone shifts in this particular speech, and he uses this to his advantage in turning the spotlight away from his private life, and to national issues. In his address, President Clinton uses a wide variety of rhetorical devices to convince his audience, the American people, that his stance on the matter is the most valid, and to reestablish his credibility,
The political cartoon displays an aerial view of a man explaining to a woman that the United States Capitol building has been working with a split down its center before the earthquake occurred. In the center of the image, Uncle Sam is hanging onto an edge with one hand as he is going to fall in the large crevice through the ground in front of the Congress building. The author exemplifies how the bias of Congress cannot understand the citizens’ interests; he attempts to describe that excessive favoritism harms Congress which makes it difficult to complete anything when neither one of the political parties agree to a compromise. The meaning of the picture is that Congress has recently been divided into two parts, and an earthquake was not the
Though Kennedy and Clinton addressed their audiences nearly thirty-two years apart, each rhetor faced a common rhetorical barrier – an American populace too heavily focused on the personalities within each respective presidential election rather than the true issues confronting the United States. To overcome that barrier, both Kennedy and Clinton utilize definitional strategies – in the form of association – as well as language strategies –specifically, historical allusions. Whether or not the speeches directly correlate with both candidates winning their presidential elections does not concern the examination; this paper observes how exactly the rhetorical devices used served to dissolve the barriers between the rhetor and the intended audience.
It is very common among the United States’ political sphere to rely heavily on T.V. commercials during election season; this is after all the most effective way to spread a message to millions of voters in order to gain their support. The presidential election of 2008 was not the exception; candidates and interest groups spent 2.6 billion dollars on advertising that year from which 2 billion were used exclusively for broadcast television (Seelye 2008.) Although the effectiveness of these advertisements is relatively small compared to the money spent on them (Liasson 2012), it is important for American voters to think critically about the information and arguments presented by these ads. An analysis of the rhetoric in four of the political campaign commercials of the 2008 presidential election reveals the different informal fallacies utilized to gain support for one of the candidates or misguide the public about the opposing candidate.
Our nation is plagued with problems, and we look to one man to solve them all, president Barack Obama. He plans to solve these in his address to the United Nations General Assembly given on September 24, 2014 in New York City. President Obama gave this speech in response to major issues that were taking place at that time. Some of the issues he talked about were Ebola, which was a deadly disease running rampant through West Africa, the conflict in Ukraine having to do with Russia, and the issue of ISIL terrorist groups. Obama talks about all of these issues to bring up one major goal of this argument. The goal is for the international community to come together to sort out and overcome the problems. He tackles two questions in this argument, “whether the nations here today will be able to renew the purpose of the UN’s founding; and
This discourse analysis attempts to answer several questions regarding Chairman Hyde's speech against the president. Firstly an attempt has been made to uncover some of the more prevalent themes and discourses in the hope that they will give some kind of enlightenment of American society and culture. Secondly, this analysis describes the many ways in which Chairman Hyde attempts to persuade his audience of his cause. The portrayed image of President Clinton is then focused on, and finally there is a discussion relating to the various social codes implied within Hyde's speech. It has been found that many of these areas overlap to a greater or lesser degree. However it is believed that the four questions should be answered separately at the risk of sounding repetitive, as this gives the reader a chance to identify and understand how ideas and themes can serve quite different purposes when expressed in different contexts and discourses, and with particular motivations.
Today, political parties can be seen throughout everyday life, prevalent in various activities such as watching television, or seeing signs beside the road while driving. These everyday occurrences make the knowledge of political parties commonly known, especially as the two opposing political parties: the Republicans and the Democrats. Republican and Democrats have existed for numerous years, predominantly due to pure tradition, and the comfort of the ideas each party presents. For years, the existence of two political parties has dominated the elections of the president, and lower offices such as mayor, or the House of Representatives. Fundamentally, this tradition continues from the very emergence of political parties during the election of 1796, principally between Federalist John Adams and Anti-federalist Thomas Jefferson. Prior to this election people unanimously conformed to the ideas of one man, George Washington, and therefore did not require the need for political parties.1 However, following his presidency the public was divided with opposing opinions, each arguing the best methods to regulate the country. Ultimately, the emergence of different opinions regarding the future of the United States involving the economy, foreign relations, ‘the masses,’ and the interpretation of the Constitution, led to the two political parties of the 1790s and the critical election of 1800.