A Rhetorical Analysis On The Republican Party

The main goal of this paper is to assess why Americans tend to feel coldly towards the United States Congress. Looking at factors such as total income, I theorize that due to the large lifestyle gap between the citizens of the U.S. and their congress the American people might feel a disconnect to Congress and in return not feel warmly towards them. By controlling for outside variables and running a multitude of tests the results have shown that the relationship between income and feelings towards congress is not spurious and can be counted on as an accurate reflection of the American people’s true feelings. However, it is an opposite relationship from my hypothesis. I hypothesize that as income decreases feelings towards Congress would grow colder; instead, tests revealed that

In 1854, the Republican Party was established as a response to controversial issues within the United States of America. The founders of this political party ‒ anti-slavery Whigs, former Democrats, former members of the Free Soil Party and Know-Nothing Party ‒ helped to identify their ideals prior to the Civil War.

To keep the American tradition, President Obama signed an executive order requiring the loser of the Presidential election to leave the country. Obama stated "No Matter who that loser is".

Presidential nominee, Hillary Rodham Clinton, in a recent speech at a private fundraising event geared toward LGBT rights supporters, addressed her political opponent, Donald J. Trump and his supporters. The fundraiser was hosted by singer and actress, Barbra Streisand and her wealthy counterparts. The former Secretary of State argued that half of Donald Trump’s supporters can be put into a “basket of deplorable” and alluded that the other half are simply anti-government. Clinton supported her assertion by using logical fallacies by making hasty generalizations, faulty cause and effect, and bandwagon appeals. She also solidified her reasoning by stating, the supporters in the “basket of deplorable” are racists, sexists, xenophobic, and many

I am so sorry that I could not have been on the call this evening. At this moment, I am going though intensive training until 10pm to be an Orientation Leader for this summer. I do hope that you all can understand my predicament.

Rhetorical Analysis: The primary audience for this paper includes every citizen aged eighteen and above eligible to vote in the United States. The proposed topic mostly concerns these individuals due to the fact, they are affected by presidential voting institutions. Throughout this paper, I will be arguing in favor of the Electoral College, with an end goal of persuading my audience of the benefits of the system.

Christine Todd Whitman chose to write this op-ed months into the Trump presidency at a time when many natural disasters plague the country. In it she addresses both the administration and her fellow Republicans, many of whom do not view climate change as a threat. Whitman’s principal grievance with Scott Pruitt, the current director of the Environmental Protection Agency (E.P.A.), is his creation of a “red team” to research an opposing view to the scientific consensus on climate change. In her op-ed, Christine Todd Whitman condemns the way Scott Pruitt runs the E.P.A. and tries to convince the reader that climate change is a tangible threat. Whitman makes it clear that her criticism is not that of a lay person or a contrarian but comes from experience and a common worldview.

So, the Republican National Convention is finally over! And I may sound like a broken record, but this really, bothered me. As you all have probably heard already, the whole thing was basically about fear.

The American political society can be divided into two main political theories of thought, liberalism and conservatism, or democrat and republican. Although, both of the political theories goal is to make America the best country that it can be, both have a different way in achieving this goal. With the presence of different beliefs comes negative opinions of the opposing group. ThePeoplesCube satirical editorial Republicanism Caused By Brain Disorder, Mutation embodies how some liberal progressive democrats see the conservative republicans. With the rhetorical strategies of logos, pathos, and ethos ThePeoplesCube is able to portray the conservative republicans as unnaturally self-centered, narrow-minded, oblivious,

After reading Dog Whistle Politics by Ian-Hanley Lopez, I became disgusted. I was with some disbelief that there were such a thing as dog whistling and how politicians use it to get votes. Most of this dog whistling tactics involves racial slurs. So I decided to do some research to see if any of the current Presidential Candidates of 2016 fell into this category. I looked at all the Republican, since Lopez’s book revolved around the GOP in using these distasteful tactics. I looked at all of the Republican Candidates polices and statements that were stated in debates, speeches, interviews, and social media sites. Unfortunately I found a candidate that was notorious for dog whistling, this Republican Candidate was Donald Trump. When it comes to Trump’s statements in debates, speeches, interviews, and social media sites a lot of negativity is involved around immigration issues in the United States.

Donald Trump’s nomination can be clearly seen as not the result of electoral flubs or the chance of history, but the result of a decades old movement. In campaign after campaign there have been candidates appealing to the same nativist tendencies, and voters who support them. It further shows another instance of a movement building within and without a party ultimately capturing the party and nominating one of their own. In Bryan’s, Reagan 's, Clinton, and Trump’s cases political commentators at the time were stunned that the party bosses could be so

As the 2016 US Presidential Election rapidly approaches, Americans continue to stand divided by party lines, with the moderates being tugged on both sides, with hopes that swaying them will put a candidate in office. However, in this critical moment that recurs every 4 years in the nation’s history, the dichotomy is drawn even deeper between the Republican and Democratic parties, with candidates on either side suggesting radically different solutions to the nation’s problems. Paul Krugman, a famous American economist, would support Hillary Clinton for the 2016 National Democratic Primary and the 2016 Presidential Election due to the unrealistic growth expectations Republicans are promising, the healthy economic policy liberals support, and

In this article the title states that Democrats “take the lead”. This tactic was also used in an earlier article, in which the news account wants the voters to get enticed and not feel as if they might not have a chance of winning for their party. I realized throughout keeping track of the news on twitter is that just like any other news source they have their biases. In the earlier article it stated that republicans had the “edge” over the democrats in Florida. My analysis is that, the news account was bias toward republicans and wants them to keep up the voting to potentially win the debate. Although these sources may seem as if they are known or credited, they still alter news to entice a certain audience. In this case it is the Democrats.

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

Donald Trump a very popular Republic candidate recently stated that “you have people coming in, and I’m talking about people that are from all over are killers and rapists and they’re coming into this country”. This statement is 50% incorrect, I will show proof and facts that prove my logic.