Note On Unemployment Rates Are Drawn From The Bureau Of Labour Statistics

The use of twitter by both the viewers and the candidates are geared toward one particular goal: to try to change the mind of voters. By candidates operating on Twitter they possess the ability to make instant rebuttals to something that another candidate has said without having to release an official statement or waiting until the next debate. Also in an age of social media candidates and their campaigns believe that it is one of the most effective ways to broadcast information and connect with voters. Twitter users also use this median as a way to make fun at a candidate’s position or simply try to convince others to change the way they have chosen to vote. Many twitter users from the Republican party took to the social media website to bash the democratic candidates and their policy positions. One user slammed a comment made by Governor Martin O’Malley that the greatest threat facing the United States was climate change. This made for a twitter field day with other users implying that the democratic candidates do not take the threat of terrorism and ISIS seriously which disqualifies them from the presidency. These type of instances can have negative effects for either party because of how quickly a retweet can make a statement viral and could end up severely hurting a campaign. However, this reaction did not alter my impression of the candidates or the debate at

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

Is making economy stronger than before. She wants to accomplish such goal through three factors: Strong Growth, Fair Growth, and Long-term Growth. Through strong growth she wants to cut taxes for hard-working families to increase their take-home pay as they face rising costs from child care, health care, and sending their kids to college(HC plans). Through fair growth she wants to strengthen overtime rules by raising minimum wage. Basically she has supported raising the federal minimum wage to $12, and believes that we should go further. With the long-term growth Hillary's comment was “It's time to push back against the forces of "quarterly capitalism" and boom and bust cycles on Wall Street”(HC plans). By that she wants to focus on long term pays, not short-term profits.

Hillary Clintons primary message is advancing opportunity and prosperity, directly addressing a fundamental concern and cynicism among the American people. Hillary Clinton also spoke about

When asked about the topic regarding America’s Direction, the subject about jobs was really acknowledged. Trump brought up how China is building almost all of our things and that jobs are leaving the US for cheap labor. He as well promised to bring back 25 million jobs back. Hillary was for making

According to a study led by the GDELT Project, television networks have mentioned Donald Trump 108,735 times and Clinton 64,345 times in the past 30 days alone. This statistic does not even include the countless information thrown at the public through websites, news publications, and social media.

Mrs. Clinton throughout the debate made two appeals to pity by referencing injured children or children afraid of being deported to target emotions. She also made many ad-homonym attacks throughout against the wealthy saying that they are manipulating the system to get away from their duty. Trump also is not free from blame in this area, making multiple part to whole arguments in reference to the Muslim community, just because some are bad does not mean they all are. He also made multiple appeals to authority by saying he was right based off him being endorsed by generals and admirals in the

In his speech, Trump appears to be talking to business owners and the wealthy, for example, he presents a scenario in which a friend of his is a manufacturer who has found himself at loss after paying a high tariff to China. When Trump explains his policies to avoid high tariffs on exported goods from America he is really only addressing business owners. Meanwhile, Clinton appears to address all the different social classes, “For the factory workers and food servers who stand on their feet all day. For the nurses who work the night shift. For the truckers who drive for hours and the farmers who feed us. For everyone who’s ever been knocked down, but refused to be knocked out”, contrary to Trump she is addressing all Americans and not just the wealthy. Furthermore, Trump tends to utilize colloquial diction in his speech, “They talked about all sorts of crap that had nothing to do with it...Hey, I’m not saying they’re stupid. I like China”, when he does this he is losing his credibility as a speaker; a potential President should not be using informal language when addressing a nation. In contrast, Clinton uses explicit diction, “We’re a better, stronger, more prosperous country when we harness the talent, hard work, and ingenuity of every single American”, and she speaks with the formality expected of a President. When contrasting the two, it becomes clear that Clinton’s speech was more effective and persuasive, because she addressed her audience in a formal manner while unifying the entire country; something Trump lacked to

Hillary Clinton’s policies would help this country grow. Clinton has clear plans to help this country. It’s sad to say that I do not know many of Donald Trump’s plans from the debate because he fails to answer specifics, but the plans he does say have almost no way of working.

The U.S. Daily Poll, conducted by Gallup, a research-based consulting company, examines the American population’s opinions on the economy, job security, presidential approval ratings, and spending. Using a dual frame design that involves both landline and cell phone numbers that are selected randomly, samples are collected for the poll and categorized under topics including employee engagement, workplace strategies, economic confidence, consumer spending, and presidential job approval. These samples then are analyzed to see the views for the American population at that time, used to formulate written opinions for various researchers and are updated every three days. Following an election season filled with turmoil, the views of American

This first presidential debate was chaos! The two candidates were just screaming over one another, and I couldn’t hear myself think! The night started out normal, or as normal as a debate is supposed to be. The two candidates seemed composed for a small period of time while acting like actual adults running for president. Unfortunately, when the first question about the economy was asked, Former Secretary Clinton decided to take a jab at Mr. Trump using a quote he had said about a potential real estate market crash in 2006. She quoted that Mr. Trump hoped for the market to crash so he could potentially buy it. To respond, Mr. Trump interrupted her and countered, "That's called business, by the way." This remark

When it comes to Economics, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton rarely agree on the same issue. For instance, on the issue of stimulus vs a market-led recovery, Donald Trump strongly thinks that the Federal Government should stay out of it as much as possible, whereas Hillary Clinton disagrees and thinks that help from the government would help the market. This is just one of the many economic issues that they strongly disagree on, Including citizenship for illegal immigrants and privatizing social security numbers.

News stations across the world have reported that Trump is being reckless with what he says on Twitter and does not think about the consequences of his words. A correlation between Trump’s tweets and the stock market was observed, resulting in even more criticism against Trump. Many are arguing that Trump should not have the power to affect the stock market with his tweets. The combination of these criticising reports and Trump’s tweets have resulted in some countries publicly speaking out against Trump, such as North Korea and China. This has drastically raised tensions, while worsening existing problems between these countries and the United States. This has led to national security threats over Trump’s twitter account. Many are worried that Trump’s tweets against North Korea and China will spark military action. Trump should not use his Twitter because his tweets have created questions about his power over the stock market, raised tensions with other countries, and claims that his tweets threaten national

In this article, two aspects of the rhetoric of U.S. President Barack Obama are studied, the content of the oral speeches and his use of his account of social network after the attacks of Boston April 2013. The research, based on the analysis of textual content of the speeches and published tweets, reveal three facts, the first fact was that Obama’s public interventions remained the proper characteristics of the U.S. presidential rhetoric to the war against terrorism, especially talking about the enemy. Second, was that these rhetorical resources moved to social networks, twitter, and the use of this network, merely reproduced purely textual fragments of what was said by the President to the media; therefore networks are used as simple dissemination

The tweets (unit of analysis) were analyzed in order to identify the components of both positive and negative attitudes towards the WC. This unit was coded into three categories: positive, neutral and negative. The coders read each tweet as a whole in order to determine whether it was in favor of a candidate, against her, or just making a neutral reference to her. Neutral references included such things as posting a link to a news story in traditional media, quoting a candidate, and posting an announcement for a candidate’s rally or media appearance. Although such tweets could have been representative of a positive leaning towards a candidate, we focused our analysis only on the explicit, verbalized political expressions of the tweeters.