Manipulation In Presidential Elections

Firstly, she uses an unemotional tone to promote her credibility as a woman politician. Instead of using flowery language and going into a fit of hysteria, which the audience expected from a woman speaker, she used concise vocabulary and kept a level head. She speaks “briefly and simply” to also show the urgency of this crisis facing the nation. In addition, she states, “I don’t want to see the Republican Party ride to political victory on the Four Horsemen of Calumny—Fear, Ignorance, Bigotry, and Smear.” This shows the audience that she wants a Republican victory, but without using tactics of the Democrats. Margaret Chase Smith remains poised, proving this is not a fit of hysteria, which gains credibility from the American public.

When asked whether he learned anything as an actor that's been useful to his presidency, Ronald Reagan replied, “ There have been times in this office when I’ve wondered how you can do the job if you hadn’t been an actor.” Politicians must employ methods of artifice and present themselves as an idealistic image of themselves in order to win elections.

In this address Clinton uses a combination of all three to try to convince people of her being the right candidate for the job. Clinton’s rhetoric depends largely on the fact of her being relatable in comparison to the millionaire Trump who makes up the much envied American and criticized elite.

           The U.S. electoral system was created to give every citizen a say in who their elected officials should be, but this system has failed miserably. The right to vote is a basic right that needs be provided to every American regardless of such traits as political party, religion, or ethnicity. It is unethical to deny a person the right to vote and historically that has been a major problem in the United States. Our election system is completely corrupt and voter rights is not the only problem, strategically drawing voting districts is also a major issue. Our current electoral system is corrupt and unethical because of gerrymandering, the breaking down of the voter rights act, and voter ID laws.

With the presidential election coming to a close, the campaigns of Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump are doing their best to attract voters now more than ever. The question is, who will be more successful? When analyzed in detail the Hilary Clinton campaign is appealing to their targeted audience in a way that makes her campaign more successful.

When Americans vote their choice for President, one would assume that these votes would be tabulated and the majority vote would win. But this is not the case at all. The Presidency is ultimately decided by the Electoral College, what William McClenaghan calls “one of the least understood parts of the American political process”(340). McClenaghan also defines the Electoral College as “the body that makes the formal selection of the nation’s President, from what the Framers intended into a `rubber stamp’ for the popular vote in presidential elections”(67). The original Electoral College did not succeed for very long, however; it only worked for as long as George Washington was President

Similar to how Queen Emma was portrayed, current female politicians are often also portrayed as cold, indifferent women unsuited for office. During the 2016 US Presidential Elections, candidate Hillary Clinton faced immense, sexist criticism from media, society, and President Trump himself. Clinton had been labeled a “nasty woman”, “untrustworthy”, and a “criminal” throughout her campaign. Many female politicians face similar sentiments and remarks. In fact, according to Terri Vescio, a psychology professor at Penn State University, “The more female politicians are seen as striving for power, the less

First Lady Michelle Obama has always been one known for her inspiring speeches and her commitment to women’s rights. In Manchester, New Hampshire, she is seen once again standing up for women and for this country by opening the public’s eyes to disrespect Donald Trump has shown for us. Throughout the entire speech the three rhetorical appeals of pathos, ethos, and logos, are all used effectively and powerfully to get her message across. She mainly targets the audience of empowered women but she also addresses the effect that voting for Donald Trump will have for men and women. Through the rhetorical appeals and the tone, she sets for her audience, Michelle Obama campaigns for the presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Carly Fiorina joined the ranks of outsider candidates to run in the 2016 election, but unlike Donald Trump, did not brand herself as an overly populist candidate. Her ad “Take Our Country Back” might have populist appeals, but focuses on the liberal conventions of setting a political agenda and convincing voters that she can lead, despite being an outsider with no political experience. The spot begins by flashing images of her opponents and their tenures in government, with voiceovers pointing out how they have done nothing to advance the Republican platform during all these years. This populist shaming sets up Fiorina’s liberal appeal and her agenda she calls a blueprint for America:

An attack on a country’s ideals is an attack on everyone’s in it. Because personal values are deep-rooted, political rhetoric often inspires emotion through personal bias to cloud perception. Habitually discovered, displays of carefully edited facts create negative value correlations to candidates. When used to portray a presidential candidate in the 2008 election year this clever tactic is effective in momentarily turning off almost an entire nation to the offending party. An overly sentimental appeal in the political advertisement "Judgement" manipulates pathos to discredit Barack Obama's ethos by associating him with his pastor's alarming proclamations.

Gail Collins, in her article “Sexism: Let’s Deconstruct Donald” (09.09.2016) suggests that Donald Trump’s attacks on Hillary Clinton could be sexist, and argues that we should “not jump to conclusions” even though Trump “makes insulting personal remarks about everyone he disagrees with”. Collins supports her claim by listing points that Trump had attacked Clinton on over this election cycle, such as Clinton’s voice, “Trump is basically saying that only guys get to holler”, Clinton’s health, “a staple of presidential politics long before we had a women in the race”, and how she does not “look” presidential. The author’s purpose is to suggest that Donald Trump’s critiques on Hillary Clinton are fueled by sexism,instead of his usual “personal

Women continue to take a stand against Donald Trump’s negative comments aiming towards them. Right after Trump called Hillary Clinton a “nasty woman” while she was answering the question of funding social security, there were women who decided that instead of being offended they went along with his quote with humor to show their independence (Kelly par. 2). Ladies are taking back his insult by calling themselves nasty women to support Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. As the night of the final debate progressed, Cara Kelly mentions that “Twitter erupted” when women promoted the insult with hashtags, tee-shirts, and even a developed website that “redirects to a Hillary Clinton donations page” (Kelly par. 4). This article then refers back

Currently, the Presidency of the United States is coming close to the final and whoever gets elected president is an accomplished liar. Both of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are using the political skills to argue because their major party candidates for president have to appear to be fully qualified to occupy the Oval Office. After watching of these videos of both Hillary and Trump’s speech, in my opinion, I analyze three types of informal fallacies from their speeches such as argument against the person, hasty generalization, and appeal to people; especially, appeal to vanity.

There has been controversy over whether or not the United States’ elections are rigged; this theory came up again when Donald Trump claimed that John Podesta, a chairman on Hillary Clinton’s campaign, rigged the polls as a voter suppression technique on October 24, 2016 (Qiu). This isn’t the first time the elections authenticity has been questioned; when we think “rigged,” it is normally referring to accusations of direct voter fraud or in which the results were procedurally contested, extensively protested, or recognized as fraudulent by a reliable international organization (Wikipedia Contributors). In fact, in the past the polls have been rigged. There have been multiple cases in the United States where the presidential election was under scrutiny dating back to 1793 all the way up to 2004 (Wikipedia Contributors). Despite Trump’s claim and the couple incident where it has happened, it is pretty impossible to actually “rig” an election with voter fraud. But, this does not mean that an election has never been rigged; they are rigged to an extent but not how Trump claimed.

In the midst of the 2016 election, First Lady of the United States, Michelle Obama gave a speech in New Hampshire regarding the candidates. Donald Trump was facing Hillary Clinton; and in support, “Michelle Obama presented a Speech On Donald Trump’s Alleged Treatment Of Women.” As stated in the title, Trump had recently made rude remarks regarding women, and Michelle Obama was using this as a learning lesson for anyone looking to vote for Trump. She made it a point to vote for Hillary by not only stating why not to vote for Trump, but also listing her many accomplishments throughout her lifetime. Michelle Obama was able to create an effective and persuasive speech by strongly stating Trump’s wrongdoings, passionately listing Clinton’s achievements, and frightening us of the possible future for our children.