GOP Debate Analysis

After the American states drafted the Constitution, there were conflicting ideas concerning how the states should be governed. Some believed that a strong federal government should wield most of the governing powers, but there was another group that opposed a strong federal government. This group, known as the Republicans, believed that the majority of governing powers should reside in state legislatures. Republicans felt that the powers of the federal government should be limited, and the Republicans believed that the Constitution supported this idea.

Another four years another presidential debate. Before I go on to the current debates let me state a few facts about past ones. The Lincoln and Douglas debate was in important because it started Lincoln presidential career. The Debates lasted from August 21 -- October 15. There where seven of them, with two days to two weeks in between. Each debate lasted three hours; first candidate spoke for one hour; the second for one and a half hours; the first replying for a half hour. Candidates alternated going first. The topics involved where primarily slavery and the Union. Other important debates were the '48 and '57. They were the only debates before 1960; there were no presidential debates between 1960 and 1976. In

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.

Rhetoric is found virtually everywhere, from billboards to commercial ads on television, it is a part of the 21st century’s daily routine. Communication thrives on rhetoric because it is the foundation of opinion. Without discussion or opinions, life will become dull and uninteresting. Political debates towards the end of presidential elections are predominately a few of the greatest examples of this. By the end of elections, a majority of people have lost interest in the repetition of each candidate, with rhetoric, people become more inclined to tune into their television to listen to two candidates debate.

There is no way you have been able to watch these debates without responding to the TV as if the candidates could hear your opinion. The candidates represent two polar opposite views on issues like women's rights, immigration, healthcare, education and taxes, and you undoubtedly have some opinion on it. As a voter, you will be sharing your opinion on questions like: Who should be getting tax breaks? Should the government help fund education? Should illegal immigrants be allowed to stay in the United States to continue their education? Your opinion must be heard. As a minor, I can advocate for

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.

We hold debates between the Republican and Democrats before the primaries, and then we hold debates between the two remaining presidential candidates. Upon first glance it may appear that the presidential debates are held to get to know the candidate’s positions on the various issues that are important to the American people; however, the format of the debates make it difficult to accomplish that task. Instead, it is more plausible that these debates are held in order to discover what the candidates are like personally because the debates provide ample opportunities for us to discover the candidate’s values. Ultimately, we want to find out the values that these potential presidents have because we want someone we trust to lead the

In the wake of the death of Antonin Scalia, the Supreme Court Justice , Republican candidates had a debate and met in South Carolina for the 9th GOP debate.This debate mainly discussed what each candidate would do if they were to become president. During these debates, the candidates are given a chance to deliver their messages , and to help voters determine which candidate will be best as president. In the republican debate, each candidate was asked a question which they was expected to answer but somehow didn't appear to do so. While watching, I came to conclusion that some of the arguments were successful and others unsuccessful. In the first section of the debate when candidates Ben Carson, Donald

The title is At Republican Debate, Candidates Are Likely to Set Sights on Ted Cruz, written by Jonathan Martin and Maggie Haberman issued on December 14, 2015. Many controversial topics have defined the previous Republican debates with Donald Trump currently leading in the polls. This article characterizes possible tactics for the final Republican debate. The subject matter of this article deals with potential Republican presidential candidates. Candidates must attack Donald Trump if they want a chance of taking him over in the polls. Some facts are based on state reporting and opinions on debate tactics. The editor does attempt to appeal to his readers' emotions by highlighting voter's concerns and issues including terrorism,

The nation has come to know the GOP as a party that embodies the essence of conservative America. One characteristic of US conservatism is forgetfulness or strategic avoidance of sensitive issues that date back as recently as six months. Everything with the GOP is yesterday, today and a conservative future.

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

A constructive national debate is something that is quite important to the functioning of the American system of democracy. A simple definition of democracy offered by the Merriam-Webster dictionary is that democracy is “a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting” (Merriam-Webster). Now, at a time of heightened awareness from many American people, the political debates in this country don’t seem to be providing them with good cogent arguments. Instead they are filled with fallacies and many falsehoods. In this essay I argue that the presidential debate system is currently not living up to its potential, and I will focus specifically on Republican primary debate that took place at the Reagan Library in Simi Valley, California. In doing so, I will argue that the main flaws in this cycle’s presidential primary debates were the amount of fallacies used, as structure used as well as provide some counter-arguments to my claims.

Television promotes the candidates’ image over their policies. Instead of the candidates discussing what they are going to do for the country, they simply argue why they are better than each other. The candidates being televised gives the audience a sense of knowing them, which causes them to “no longer feel the need for party guidance”(Source B). In other words, the audience no longer feels the need of the politician's policies due to basing their judgments on the superficial characteristics. In a recent political debate, candidates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton argued that their images weren’t very presidential. It started off with Trump saying Clinton didn’t have the looks and the stigma of a president and she quickly fired back that Trump didn’t have the temperament. Instead of discussing how they were going to run the country they just bickered about appearance. The

The presidential race for the 2016 election are in full effect. The candidates are campaigning hard and debating on various issues all for one thing the chance to become the next president of the United States. The reason people vote is to make a change. In order to win, they must convince voters that they are the best for the job, a part of a politician's job is to address issues. How do the candidates successfully do this? By the use of rhetoric, whether it be through oration, discourse debates, television, or radio political advertisements. A rhetorical situation has three components exigence, audience, constraints. According to Bitzer in order to have a rhetorical situation you must be addressing an issue, or else there is no 'situation'.

Anderson judge’s president Trumps comments like he was wrong. He played several video clips and then after he stated reason why he thought Donald trump was wrong. Hannity on the other hand said the he thinks what happen was wrong but he did not seem like he was disagreeing with Trump so much he just basically blamed the press. He said that what Trump said was good enough for him but never good enough for the media. Andersons argument was based off of logos because he was not doing anything but stating straight facts, but I believe Hannitys argument was based off of pathos because of how he felt he basically expected everybody to feel the same way. I find Andersons side more persuasive even though he was not trying to be persuasive, I feel