Both “Donald Trump’s Sad, Lonely Life” by David Brooks and “The Art Of the Comeback: Donald Trump’ Debate W Propels Him Toward White House” by Matthew Boyle highlight the very intense presidential debates going on and illustrate how divided this country is. This election season has been one like no other so far with Donald Trump surprisingly winning the republican nominee even though he lacks much needed experience; versus Hillary Clinton whom most people expected to be the Democratic nominee and also has previous experience as the secretary of state. Both of these sources contain great favoritism and also contain a different purpose. This can be shown by the way that they describe the debate and how it reflects the media’s biased role by constantly presenting propaganda. Both of these articles are clearly biased and should not be used to decide on who to vote for; this is shown through their uses of rhetorical strategies such as tone, diction and audience. David Brooks source “Donald Trump’s Sad, Lonely life” is evidently biased towards Hillary Clinton and he uses a negative tone to attempt to sway people away from voting for Trump. “He was a germophobe through most of his life and cut off contact with others, and now I just picture him alone in the middle of the night, tweeting out hatred.” This quote shows how David Brooks uses strong diction such as “germophobe” and “cut of contact with others” to create a negative tone unlike source A towards Donald Trump.
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Nicholas Kristof’s “3 Peerless Republicans for President: Trump, Carson and Fiorina”, deems the leading candidates from the Grand Old Party unfit for presidency, and the public’s fixation with them a temporary affair. Multiple previous controversies being detailed, and the use notably bleak statistics help undermine the contenders while urging voters to look elsewhere. Kristof utilizes harsh diction with a simple, yet critical tone to denounce the trio, and further his own
The author starts out the article using a humorous anecdote by comparing Trumps and Clinton's expressions while talking about the
In his article “Only Trump Can Trump Trump” (2016), Thomas L. Friedman argues that Donald Trump is the only one who can “trump Trump” or ruin himself. Friedman supports his position by providing evidence on the mishaps of the G.O.P and using his personal experience as credible evidence; he also utilises data that he words into a sarcastic and incendiary tone which provokes anger and irritation towards Trump and the G.O.P from his readers. Friedman wishes to influence his audience to dislike Trump and see the G.O.P as people who are infantile, hypocritical and compulsive by his flagrant diction and his excessive usage of tone; his dislike of the Republicans’ ideas and actions is made clear through his incredibly critical and sarcastic tone, he continuously devalues
Joseph Epstein in his article “Trump and the Plutocrat’s Hubris,” speaks to Trump’s role in the government, and the extent to which businessmen can be successful in a political setting. Although it could be argued that Epstein’s article in objective, the use of pathos, diction, and tone throughout his article shows that the article in innately subjective. “My father was a moderately successful businessman…” By stating this, the article automatically becomes subjective. Epstein brings in a personal story, which in turn alludes to the reader that the article is his opinion.
more emotional effect on the reader because they’re the last words their minds process, and thus more bound to resonate with them. After a paragraph that specifically described Trump and Cruz supporters as small-minded and vicious, “shivers” is likely to produce a sense of alertness and possibly fear. Therefore, the word “shivers”, used as both evidence and to build pathos, Bruni appeals to the readers emotions, reinforcing the terrifying truth that there are individuals in America fully supporting Trump and Cruz. In an effort to appeal to pathos, Bruni effectively uses sentence structure to question the reader’s values and cue the audience to Trump and Cruz’s absurd behavior.
While re-watching some of Donald Trump’s speeches that he gives during his “Presidential campaign”, I noticed just how much he uses Aristotle’s three appeals. This method are both hurting and helping him at the same time. He uses pathos or the emotional appeal quite frequently. Donald has a specific target audience that he appeals to when he says that he is speaking to America. I feel as if his demographic is older white people who feel as if their country is no longer what it used to be.
President Trump’s State of the Union address discusses many of the United State’s most disputed topics, such as immigration. Though the address possesses its supporters, it also contains critics. The Washington Examiner titles its headline, “Trump won on immigration... the media ignored it” by Eddie Scarry, a supporter of President Trump’s State of the Union address. This article first discusses how President Trump communicates a story of a family who lost their two daughters because an illegal immigrant murdered them.
The author claims that "one thing is certain: Mr. Trump cannot lose. Because he's already won. " He uses language such as "foolish" to describe those who expect Trump to lose. He goes even as far as to swear on several occasions throughout the piece, showcasing his emotional attachment to the topic in question.
In “Trapped in Trump’s Brain” is an editorial written by Maureen Dowd, a democratic columnist. Recently, President Trump has been passing many laws that the public disagree upon such as the Ban Act. He also lack giving a good and efficient response in interviews. Many people see him having characteristics of a dictator. Her is that because Trump does not trust anyone who disagrees with him it leads to a political mess and shows his narcissistic side.
The recent 2016 Election was controversial and showcased just how divide our nation has become. The results of the election surprised many who believed there was no possible way Donald Trump would be elected president. This unraveled tension was met with uproar and confusion. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote whereas Donald Trump won the electoral vote, thus making him the President-elect
The ad “You Make Me Feel” is based off the 2016 Presidential campaign between Former First Lady Hillary Clinton and President Donald Trump. The ad was produced and published October 31, 2016 by Priorities USA in an effort to discredit Donald Trump and show Americans that Hilary Clinton was the best choice for presidency. Throughout the presidential campaign Donald Trump was criticized about his sexist behavior, accused of sexual harassment and victimizing women. Priorities USA used these accusations as a kairotic moment eight days prior to the election to persuade women to vote for Hilary Clinton. The “You Make Me feel” political advertisement uses Aristotelian rhetorical appeals, logos, ethos, pathos and metaphors to persuade the target audience, women, to vote against presidential candidate Donald Trump because he doesn’t respect women.
President Donald Trump. Even to those who had voted for Trump this election, I doubt you ever expected to hear those words four years ago. Now added to the great list of men that lead this beautiful, that slots among Honest Abe, The American Cincinnatus, Old Hickory, and Father of the Constitution, is The Tumpster. Dana Milbank's mocking article “In which Trump discovers some guy named Frederick Douglass” Donald Trump is contrasted to the expectation of how leaders perform and act by the juxtaposition of the expectation, the allusion of similar incidents, and the situational irony of the thirteen days that he has been in office.
Introduction: A Basket of Deplorable(s): Democratic Presidential Nominee Hillary Clinton’s Use of the Word Deplorable Before addressing the quote-on-quote controversial word used by the Democratic Presidential Nominee Hillary Clinton to describe half the supporters of the Republican Nominee Presidential Nominee Donald Trump Campaign, it is important to make one fact clear. Regardless of the political spectrum, presidential candidates support, presidential candidates should never negatively described their opponents’ group of supporters and/or voters. In other words, attacking presidential candidates’ campaign is one factor, but attacking their supporters is another issue within itself, which causes more harm than good.
In my paper, I will analyse Donald Trump’s political activities before and after the election to get an objective viewpoint of America’s President. We’ll start off with the history of Trump, both personal and political, to see whether there was some sort of significant development over the years indicating a tendency towards ‘good or evil’. Next, we will take a look at what Donald Trump promised to do – the wall, lowering taxes and repealing Obamacare to name a few – and evaluate if he managed to keep his election pledges. This success rate is a major factor in definitively assessing Trump’s influence on America.
Fallacies in political speeches: Donald Trump announces he is running for president. Donald Trump’s one very distinct “ability” is making a vast amount of people react to what he says. Be it good or bad, this makes him gain more attention not only in the United States, but all over the world. At the end of the day, what really matters is if his statements have, in fact, any effect on people’s votes. So for those who are not yet sure about his sincerity, it only takes a not to deep analysis of his speeches to spot serious fallacies.