Why Did Hillary Clinton Use Central Routes To Persuasion?

The recent election of 2016 shows that artifice is essential in winning voters. Donald Trump, throughout his campaign, displayed an image of himself that people would perceive as “tough” and “strong”. The image of Trump as a reality TV star made him more likable by Americans. Trump spoke openly to people's economic stress, cultural fears and the disillusion with politicians. He promised to “bring

Global debates are dominated by controversial political figures that use charged arguments to debate the most controversial issues on the political agenda. The authors argue that success in politics is not about being right or well-reasoned. Instead, it is asserted that success in politics is the ability to imprint positive associations in the long-term memories of voters. More so, success in politics is may be the ability to craft regular, credible, and persuasive arguments that resonate with those of one’s

The first persuasion method the candidates used was ethos, or the appeal to ethics. George H.W. Bush first used ethos when he was talking about how he is the national president, “you ought a be in the white house for a day, and hear what I hear, and see what I see, and read the mail that I read.” President Bush was trying to deploy ethos right here because of his credibility and his experience as a president, he’s been in this position before and it makes it seem like the American people can trust him more than the other candidate Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton uses ethos while answering the question in the way he states, “In my state, when people lose their jobs there is a good chance I know them by their names, if a factory closes I know the people that ran it.” Clinton is

While viewing Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump speeches’ many would claim that they both have mastered the rhetorical triangle. As candidates, they both have both displayed strong and weak uses of their rhetoric. Aristotle also said that, “rhetoric is basis of democratic engagement in civic life.” Mastering rhetoric to appeal to the voters will be one of the key elements that determines our next president. Donald Trump attempts to use pathos a lot. He tries to play on the audience’s emotions. In one of his most controversial speeches he stated, “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending the best. They’re not sending you, they’re sending people that have lots of problems and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs.

During the final parts of the 2016 presidential election, Chris Christie gave a last ditch effort in a speech at the Republican National Convention to persuade all citizens on the fence of voting for either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, to vote for Donald Trump. Using Persuasive diction, pathos, and near arrogant body language by pointing to the crowd and T.V. camera, buffing out his chest while he glares into the camera, Chris Christie proved how Hillary wasn’t fit to be president while attempting to help Donald Trump fulfill his goal of becoming president. Christie uses positive diction to show how he believes Donald Trump is the best fit to be president out of the remaining candidate, using words such as “strong” “caring” and “genuine” (Reilly) to describe President Trump in a positive way. Christie uses these words to describe Trump as a normal person, or as a “friend” (Reilly) to bring him down to the same level as the citizens voting for him.

On November 3, 2016 in Berwyn, Pennsylvania our soon to be First Lady, Melania Trump, gave a speech addressing her past along with her hopes for the future of the United States. Over the past two years, political figures have been debating and campaigning for who would become America’s 45th President. As the candidates filtered down to Hilary Clinton, the Democratic nominee, and Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, the amount of rallies held to gain their supporters’ votes grew in abundance. Days prior to the Election Night, Melania Trump delivered her speech in hopes of gaining the votes of citizens who had not yet decided. Throughout this paper I will discus how the theory of ethos is used across Mrs. Trump’s speech to work for and against her.

Because both presidential hopefuls use the same strategy over and over, does it continue to still be affective on the audience. Well, looking at the way that both Hillary and Trump had made many arguments based on their opinion of the audience, it goes to show that they don’t hold the audience in the highest respect; yet the audience would still voice their opinions on their candidate through their applause. Knowing that the American people like to be entertained it is shown through both Hillary and Trumps actions that they would make somewhat illogical arguments to try and keep the audience on their side. This strategy actually worked too. Obviously the somewhat “silly” arguments that were made actually made implications on the audience to convince them to support a certain successor.

Equality. Increase. Innovation. Are only three words, of countless others, that hold weight in our economy today. The mere thought of these words brings excitement without having to know the situation of what they are referencing. But, when used in context of a particular moment they bring meaningful significance. For instance, in the 2016 Clinton-Trump Presidential Debate the nominees used similar words when describing strong solutions on how to uplift the economy, if chosen as the next President of the United States of America. This presidential election year is one that has the utmost talked about and followed, so surely many people tuned in to the broadcast or later read over the transcript. The first topic of the night was “Achieving Prosperity” with a primary focus on jobs in the economy. I will be analyzing Hillary Clinton’s rhetorical strategies and appeals used in the debate on September 26th, 2016. Moreover, she establishes credibility from her previous experience and titles in government, appeal to pathos by referencing to her personal life and family

It took me a minute to figure out if I wanted to write about the topic that first came to mind for this discussion post. Eventually, deciding to go ahead and write about a conversation I had at work with a fellow co-worker. It is a hot button issue in the USA right now and sparks controversy when spoken of. The presidential race is my persuasion topic. I am a Hillary Clinton supporter, and my colleague is a Donald Trump follower. My thinking was not so much to try and get him to vote for Hillary Clinton, but to persuade him to think deeply about why he is choosing to vote for Trump in the election. For instance, he could not explain why he was voting for Trump. His response was always anything but Hillary.

The first presidential debate was held on September 26th, 2016 between the democratic candidate, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and the republican candidate Donald Trump. Although most sources determined it was a one sided battle in favor of Hillary Clinton, her opposition did have a few strong arguments. One of Mr. Trump’s strongest points was the strategy he presented on how he would bring jobs back to the United States. Trump’s plan was based on a tax he would implement on outsourcing product for creation, he claims that such a tax would discourage large businesses from leaving the country due to the fact that it would be in their best financial interests to stay in the U.S. and avoid the tax. I feel that this was a key strong point for Trump for multiple reasons, the first being that since his campaign has been built on the fundamental idea that he is a superb business man, this strategy reinforced the idea of his business oriented mindset. The second reason this was a solid point for Mr. Trump is that his plan was simple, logical, and most importantly easy to comprehend. He presented

During the 2016 Presidential campaign between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, there were many campaign advertisements from both sides that strongly resonated with voters. Clinton’s role model ad, for example, sent a powerful message by illustrating Trump’s substandard behavior as a presidential candidate. On the other hand, Trump’s “Hillary Clinton won 't Change Washington” ad demonstrated Clinton’s ineffectiveness as a leader as well as being part of the problem and not the solution. For example, one of the reasons that Trump was able to win the 2016 presidency was to increase voter turnout from the white working class male by connecting Clinton to the Washington elites. As a result, this paper will be examining the effects and implications that both of these campaign ads had towards the electorate in terms of how each candidate’s message played a role in the outcome of the 2016 Presidential election.

The concept I’ve chosen to discuss is Perceived Similarity. One of the principles of this theory is that in general, people are more likely to be affected by persuasion if underlying similarities exist. I absolutely agree with that ideal primarily because that is essentially how Presidential candidates gain people’s votes and amass so many supporters. Though I also believe that people can become susceptible to persuasion when they’ve developed preconceived notions of someone or something prior to acquiring an in-depth knowledge of the subject at hand. This is a real issue in our country today as people seem to always be in such a hurry, which only leads to making irrational decisions instead of taking the time to conduct proper research on a subject that requires tremendous thought in order to make an educated

Social psychology plays an important role in aspects of our everyday lives from the decisions we make to shaping our personality and behaviour. In this paper I will discuss a pressing example of one which is latest and most controversial presedential election that occurred in November at the resulting actions of the American people. These psychological concepts played a crucial role in many ways such as molding the voters’ minds which determined their actions and behaviours and playing on the psychology of the candidate’s opponents to gain the upper hand. The concepts I will discuss are the primacy vs recency effect, conformity, and various techniques in persuasion. Finally I will talk about how these techniques could be resisted and a more global use of these factors.

During political events, such as the presidential elections, the nominee wants the audience to vote for him or her, so they must find a way to connect to their audience. In A Philosophy of Rhetoric Campbell writes, “But as the fitness of the arguments, in these respects, depends on the capacity, education, and attainments of the hearers … this properly belongs to the consideration which the speaker ought to have of his audience, not as men in general, but as men in particular” (924). Although in A Rhetoric of Motives, Burke argues that the message is the most important part of the rhetorical triangle, Campbell argues that the speaker must think about their audience first to then tailor a way convince them. For instance, in Hillary Clinton’s attempts to gain the votes of young adults, she

The effective and successful persuasion of the actor can also occur in dependency to the relationship and the image of the persuader. More specifically, persuasion can occur if the persuader is an in-group member, a culturally legitimized authority, and if his intentions are recognized to be trustworthy. Indeed persuasion represents public conformity due to private acceptance.