The third, and final, device Florence Kelley uses to build her argument is a shift in topic. Her speech is delivered to the National American Woman Suffrage Association, a group primarily concerned with the equality of voting laws. She vows to use her right to petition “in every possible way until the right to ballot is granted.” By referring to a common goal shared by the author and her audience, a sense of trust is established between the two parties. This collects extra support for her main cause, child labor laws. Children are meant to run, play, and be free, not work excessive hours in a heinous factory.
Elizabeth Cady Stanton gave her speech during the Women’s Suffrage Convention in 1868 in Washington, D.C. and Susan B. Anthony gave her speech after being arrested for casting an illegal vote in the presidential election of 1872. Both played a big part in getting the nineteenth amendment passed however Susan B. Anthony had passed away before the amendment was passed. The arguments between the two essays were nearly the same but with just a few differences. Stanton’s argument was more about how women deserved to be equal to men in every way. She also thought that the government should not just be run by men, that there should be some women helping to make the laws.
She brought to the table a new idea that was supposed to rock the American people and shatter the glass ceiling. That brand new idea was partially her leading as the first women president, but also the encompassing idea that we need to break down social barriers in America. Her rhetoric focused around this idea throughout her entire campaign. A perfect example of this would be in Mrs. Clinton’s concession speech. In her speech Mrs. Clinton remarks, “It was about the country we love and building an America that is hopeful, inclusive, and big-hearted.
J. Howard Miller had a hidden message within the idea of creating the poster in this image. He wanted American women to see the power in Rosie’s bicep but also the neatness and how conservative she was in her work uniform. He wanted to advertise that the two concepts could be balanced. This approach reached out the millions of women because it once again proved reassurance. Many women were doubtful that they could not leave for the work force without giving up something in their personal life.
The 2016 Presidential Election was one of the craziest events in United States history. Obviously, Donald Trump won and it affected millions of people, whether it was in a good way or a bad way. In the article, “Donald Trump’s Inaugural Address Was Great”, by James Poulos, Trump was considered to be “great and logical” (Poulos). However, in the article, “Don’t Believe the Populism of Trump’s Inaugural Address. Our President is a Plutocrat”, by Ryan Cooper, Trumps is considered to be a terrible person, and he does not to deserve to be president.
By now, anyone who has paid attention to this presidential election cycle understands how Donald Trump behaves. When attacked or criticized, the GOP Presidential Nominee “counterpunches” with his own attacks and criticism which almost always come out harsher and unconventional. In the media, his responding rhetoric is largely portrayed and spun as the latest “new low” for his candidacy. To his adversaries, Trump’s response further proves their point he 's “temperamentally unfit” to be the President of the United States. For his supporters and the multitude of neutral independents, it matters less what Trump says when countering attacks.
“..Republican front-runner businessman Donald Trump, says he’ll undo Obama 's executive orders on immigration,” Article Two Sisters Two Americas by Brooke Ross states on page 11 in the New York Times Upfront April 4, 2016 edition. This has sparked outrage among people who know that most of the immigrants are good people who are trying to flee from violence that threatens to tear apart their lives. Brooke Ross helps people understand what life is like for families with a mixed-status and what we need to do about illegal immigration in her article Two Sisters Two Americas. By showing both sides of the big Democrat v Republican fight on what should be done about illegal immigration she lets people come to their own conclusions. The evidence however is firmly in favor of helping the immigrants by offering a path to
She believes that if women were given a say so, the streets would be cleaner, the food would be cleaner, and the rate of children dying from deadly diseases would drastically drop. In the next few paragraphs I will do my best to show you how Jane Addams was successful in persuading the American people that a change was necessary for the future of their children, for the future of America. When asked if Jane Addams was a neutral citizen in the face of women’s suffrage, one can easily come to the conclusion that she was not. She shows this through-out the entire document and through the significant amount of research that she puts into this document. She includes many examples in the document that show she fully supports the
In modern mass media, we see terms such as “liberal” and “conservative” get thrown around constantly. Political figures and pundits alike bitterly debate over issues such as abortion and Social Security. Presidential candidates make promises that fall in line with their political party. But most notable of all is the fact that the two biggest and most influential political parties, the Democratic Party and Republican Party, cannot seem to agree on any issue no matter how trivial or critical it may be. We hear news reports on Obamacare being despised by Republicans, or House Republicans promising to veto any form of gun control.
Immigration is often talked about due to the presidential election this year. The two presidential candidates have very different views on immigrants. The Democratic Party believes that immigrants boost our economy and they should be able to stay. Meanwhile the Republican Party believes we should kick immigrants out and build a wall between the United States and Mexico, so it is harder for people to migrate over (Walsh). Over the years the laws involving immigration have changed as the world changed.