Don T Vote Purpose

She has a paper in front of her that had quite a bit of writing on it. At times she would read completely from the paper, other times she would look out at the audience and recite from memory. Her attire was casual, sporting a tie dyed shirt, and some jeans. This fit the event nicely, and made people relate to her more. She spoke into the microphone efficiently, ensuring the audience could hear her.

She states many of her opinions on how the press should stop telling and spreading false events and ideas in the newspaper. When given the chance she tells her audience journalist about how the American press about her feels and how she feels challenged by them. Overall, the beginning of her speech tells the audience how she is going to state information and how they should listen to

Once Ms. Knight comes on stage she opens by explaining that she is happier now that she has discovered the “Magic of Not Giving a F***”. Listeners were warned prior to the speech that there would be some use of strong language; however, the extensive use of strong language at the beginning of the speech does affect the view on has on her. After hearing her swear so freely at the beginning of the speech I started to take her less seriously. What had happened was that it had negatively affected my view of her overall character. You can note the audience did find it funny at first, a first few minutes you can hear people having side conversations. Something that Professor Shubb touches upon in her TEDx Talk “The Power of Public Listening”. She notes that in order for a speech to successful it’s

The address also says, “It is a death grapple between the forces which deny and those which uphold the truths of the Declaration of Independence.” This passage denounces the people opposing women’s suffrage as not upholding the Declaration of Independence. The author insinuates that the opposing party is unpatriotic and violates the Declaration of Independence. The “Address to Congress on Women’s Suffrage” says, “A theory which prevents a nation from keeping up with the trend of world progress cannot be justified.” This quotation suggests that America will be behind the other democratic countries in the world for not supporting women’s suffrage. This creates guilt in the opposers for the hinderance of America’s progression. The speech also says, “That our nation may resume its world leadership in democracy” when women are allowed to vote. This shows that not allowing women to vote is taking away democracy from America. America is built on democracy, so taking away democracy is taking away America as it is known today. Both speeches effectively persuade through the use of word choice to promote the idea of patriotism. Another similarity between the two speeches is that they are both a call to action. The “Pearl Harbor Address to the Nation” asks that Congress declare a state of war, and the “Address to Congress on Women’s Suffrage” is call to action for Congress to support women’s suffrage. The

The speaker Emma Gonzalez is persuasive about her speech ‘We call BS’ a student at the Parkland, Florida high school, calls out President Trump and the NRA by name at an anti-gun rally in Fort Lauderdale, Florida Gonzalez always showed her logos and ethos by stating that she carried notes from her AP class with her which shows she prepared and she knows what she’s doing. She also stated facts about past shooting which supported her belief strongly. Her pathos was shown when she would emphasize some statements to show she really meant it and it showed that she really wanted to change the problem. She spoke loud and clear as well and managed not to cry in front of the crowd.

However, the speech flipped an interesting emotional switch when she said that she was very anxious about giving the speech. She implied that she wasn’t sure what to say to a group of talented women. I don’t exactly understand her thought when it came to this part, because what would be the point of telling the audience that you’re anxious. For me, it just slowed down the pacing of the speech, because we’re waiting longer for her to get to her actual thesis.

Finally, Clinton shifts to ethos to finish off his speech strongly and efficiently. Without him even mentioning it, his credibility as a speaker is already set due to the fact that he was the last democratic president of the United States which in a lot of people’s opinions qualifies him as someone who could accurately talk about the recovery of the county and know what is going on. Even before he was president, Clinton was also the governor of Arkansas who worked with previous republican presidents such as Ronald Reagan on welfare reform and George H.W. Bush to help with the national education goals, furthering his credibility as a political figure who has the background to sustain the claims he’s making in his speech to support the reelection

She makes great points that women will no longer be depending on men for money and that women have the ability to be just as successful as the men. Though the main focus is on colored women and men she makes it clear that one days she hopes that it is equal rights for all, no matter what skin color or gender. The ability to back up all of her facts with supporting details made the speech much more

She goes through each argument against buying local with thorough arguments and even concedes sometimes to her opponent in a way that does not take away from her argument. When discussing the fact that buying local sometimes hurts workers in third-world countries she acknowledges that but does not let it bring her argument to a screeching halt. Instead she admits that it could have negative effect but the positive effects should not be ignored. It seemed like she managed to avoid any errors while talking about her topic. Her tone could be at times a bit biased which became noticeable when she would talk about her past and how that connected with the idea of buying local. Besides that she made it reader friendly by explaining things simply with words that were accessible. The point where the effects of global warmings were discussed was written in an easily accessible manner. What I liked best was that she tore apart people’s arguments thread by thread which made it easier to support her side of the issue. While she did discuss certain parts about buying local that bothered people she could have been talked about more critiques toward buying local. All in all she made many valid points about buying local in a good

Anthony’s speech on the rights of women voters was not an entirely effective argument. In fact, the easiest opposing viewpoint would be an attack Anthony’s credibility; considering she was just arrested and was awaiting her trial – a trial that was decided without being delivered to the jury (Pryibil, “Susan’s Sentence”). It is hard to believe that someone who broke the law could be a credible source. Another argument against Anthony’s reliability would be whether or not she presented a fair and unbiased view, considering her active part in promoting the rights of women and her possible preceding arrest. However, she still had credibility within her group of supporters and others, because in their eyes she had not broken the law, according to the 14th Amendment; she had only done what that Amendment gave her the natural right to carry

From a communication and speech analysis stand point Ms. Alexander kept her self poised, keep her tone of voice smooth and inflecting when she needed to drive certain points home. She kept the audience engaged by moving around telling personal anecdotes that related to her topic to allow the persuasiveness of her speech to drive home about the problem of the criminal justice system and race as a whole. Her first point that really captivates and hooks you in within a matter of minutes of listening to the speech is when she says, “ People of color are the main ones incarcerated…Put in cages and treated worse than animals.” Right their she captivates and audience that otherwise believe she's crazy talking about race in the criminal justice system. Ms. Alexander managed to captivate and all WHITE audience on a topic that most had already made up there minds on. Her speech was effective in that all statistics about her topic she

A quick summary of Susan B. Anthony’s speech. She is basically saying she has committed no crime. Reasoning behind that is because all people have the right to vote. The rights that they have are natural born rights. Which are protected by many documents made to give us rights .I think she has a very good argument with very good points.It is persuasive and it makes you start thinking about what she is saying. The parts that are especially effective is when she brings up multiple historical documents showing that her as a woman has the right to vote and has committed no crime. The thing that was less convincing was when she just kept bring up the documents constantly. I agree with her decision to break the law because that was a big step towards women's rights being taken more serious.

She recognizes the effect that rhetoric has on the live audience which was composed of clergymen. As stated by McGiness, the Presidential Prayer Breakfast had a “personal nature” which “enable[ed] Clinton to discuss his personal journey of repentance”, something the clergy are accepting of and appreciate listening to. McGiness also focuses on how the multiple religious references portray spiritual themes to the audience, something Clinton knows they will relate to therefore enhancing his character. McGiness made sure to point out how Clinton works the crowd with rhetoric to be relatable, and how he succeeds in doing

The main idea for speech one is that even though Jesse Ventura changed his occupation from wrestling to politics he is more concerned with foolish propositions rather than the well-being of the people of Minnesota. When I watched the video the speaker made great eye contact, but lacked passion about her topic which in the end would not have persuaded me to vote against Jesse Ventura. The main idea for speech two is that there needs to be more detailed clarification about ascending to the rank of commander-in-chief if the original president is removed from office. When watching the video the speaker easily pulled me in to her speech to where I wanted to hear more. She interacted with the audience, made perfect eye contact, and was

Gloria emphasizes the theme that nothing will get done or change in our world if all of our people, or at least a large portion of them, won't advance their efforts into participating in our own matters. Her mother had doubts that her vote meant nothing to the election, and even going so far to question why people should vote in the first place. Gloria goes on about what she has learned in her social studies class and how "voting is on of the most important elements of democratic government." Furthermore, bringing up the story of how American Women came to vote tops the cake in supporting her claim, that "single votes can often make monumental different." Gloria successfully convinces her mother that her vote can make a dynamic difference