Given our recent viewing and readings of the political landscape of the founding of our current republic, what conclusions can you make about the use of rhetoric in politics? How has rhetoric continued to be a factor in our elections and in our perceptions of political figures? Answer BOTH those questions by using the Federalist/Anti-Federalist arguments we read in class yesterday combined with your current knowledge and expertise of the political situation in our own time.
BE SPECIFIC by citing the text DIRECTLY. If you are referring to something more recent (Obama, McCain, etc), please use the Internet and CITE DIRECTLY giving the website where you obtained the information you used.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
23 comments:
According to Antifederalist #1, "The PEOPLE are the grand inquest who have the RIGHT to judge of its merits." This is very true, because politicians try to influence the voters, and its overall the voters choice to vote for who they prefer.
That is why current politicians try to get people to vote for them using persuasive rhetoric. Obama for example said, "If you're walking down the right path and you're willing to keep walking, eventually you'll make progress." (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/b/barack_obama.html)
He is using persuasive language in saying that if you keep trying you'll eventually make progress in your life. America is looking for a person like this because he can honestly relate to the American public. Using rhetoric to get his point across, Obama is now up 49% to 40% in the national poll over John McCain.
Obama uses rhetoric to get points and views across in a personal, straight-forth way. He connects with the viewers and uses that to his advantage; sharing his points, as well as, making you turn toward him and away from John McCain.
Rhetoric is a tremendous factor on politics because if you can connect with the audience and get them to agree with you, then you are on your way to office. Obama is winning because he expresses his opinions in a more professional and personal way then John McCain does. Therefore, I believe Obama will recieve the presidency. Rhetoric will always be a factor in politics because people will always veer toward the more persuasive speaker.
Sources:
Anti Federalist #1
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/b/barack_obama.html
Politicians use rhetoric to connect with an audience while playing to their strengths and avoiding their weaknesses. Sarah Palin for example doesn’t have much knowledge on important political issues; she uses a strategy to connect with the audience or the “common folk”. In fact she uses her lack of knowledge and foreign experience as a positive thing; CNN anchor Lou Dobbs even referred to her when he said “there isn’t anything wrong with being an ordinary American.” When governor Palin speaks she specifically plays to the emotions of the American voter. She uses the fact that she is a woman and a mother to connect with the large amounts of undecided female voters. Even the humor in her speeches is directed to draw the votes of common middle class Americans the Republican Party needs to win. She talks about her young son Trig and promises the families of special needs children that they will have a friend and advocate in the White House. No decent human can condemn her for being an advocate for the children who need help the most.
From Gov. Sarah Palin’s speeches you wouldn’t immediately think she would be harmful to Washington. From listening to her the voter is forced to think that maybe it would be a good thing to have a more common American in the White House. However, shouldn’t our officials be the ones with the most experience?
-Emerson Jones-->
Oh my sources were:
-the Lou Dobbs quote was from me watching CNN last night
-the Sarah Palin words were from her Vice President Nomination Acceptance Speech at the RNC.
-Emerson Again.
Rhetoric is used in politics as a method of persuasion. Words being decorated by attractive sayings and tantalizing topics are used more often in the world of politics than any other. Much of the entire ideas behind what the candidates stand for are expressed through speech so if the candidates were unable to speak well or fluently their messages would not only be scrambled but they would be considered less than they are solely based on their poor use of words. All of that centers around rhetoric, because even in the message isn’t scrambled it still may not come across the way it is intended because of the lack of the use of rhetoric.
The whole idea is to convince the audience that the authors believe what the audience believes, the audience believes what the author believes and that the author is the best one to get the idea or message across. In politics the authors are the politicians. Speeches are used to demonstrate their use of rhetoric and hopefully win over the people or audience. “They cry aloud the whole must be swallowed or none at all, thinking thereby to preclude any amendment; they are afraid of having it abated of its present RIGID aspect.” The anti-federalist who wrote this statement may or may not have believed that “they”, being the people, really mattered at all but he convinced the audience that he did. Even in today’s time candidates still use some of the same messages as the candidates in history but the use of rhetoric has changed and hopefully improved. Majority of the time great speakers aren’t an necessity, only great use of rhetoric.
{(*♥S.Thomas♥*)}
The way politicians use rhetoric to connect with their audiences is very simple. They focus mainly on their good qualities rather than their bad. The use of this rhetoric has been used forever and a day. Everytime there is a debate or a speech from a political figure, whether it be a president or senator, they are ussualy trying to convince the people that they are making the right move in making the country better. Rhetoric has been a factor in our elections in how we view our political figures because they persuade us to vote for them. They also use rhetoric to try to persuade people that they are doing the right thing about national issues.
For example, on September 24, 2008, George W. Bush made a speech on the economic issues in America. During the speech, while tlking about a rescue effort, he says, “It will help American consumers and businesses get credit to meet their daily needs and create jobs. And it will help send a signal to markets around the world that America’s financial system is back on track.” In saying this I believe that President Bush is trying to persuade us as Americans to support the economic resue effort because it is going to improve jobs and job oppurtunities.
(Source) Text of President Bush’s Speech on Economic Crisis
The way politicians use rhetoric to connect with their audiences is very simple. They focus mainly on their good qualities rather than their bad. The use of this rhetoric has been used forever and a day. Everytime there is a debate or a speech from a political figure, whether it be a president or senator, they are ussualy trying to convince the people that they are making the right move in making the country better. Rhetoric has been a factor in our elections in how we view our political figures because they persuade us to vote for them. They also use rhetoric to try to persuade people that they are doing the right thing about national issues.
For example, on September 24, 2008, George W. Bush made a speech on the economic issues in America. During the speech, while tlking about a rescue effort, he says, “It will help American consumers and businesses get credit to meet their daily needs and create jobs. And it will help send a signal to markets around the world that America’s financial system is back on track.” In saying this I believe that President Bush is trying to persuade us as Americans to support the economic resue effort because it is going to improve jobs and job oppurtunities.
(Source) Text of President Bush’s Speech on Economic Crisis
-S.Everhart-
Given our recent readings of the political landscape, it can be infered that rhetoric can be used in politics through a couple different ways. Past and present politicians have used rhetoric as a persuasive tool. For example, in the Antifederalist Papers it was stated "The PEOPLE are the grand inquest who have a RIGHT to judge of its merits". No common person who reads this is going to disagree, because it is suggesting that the people are the ultimate judge of what happens. The politicians who made this argument were using language in a way that would persuade a certain group of people.
Rhetoric is also a large part of elections and how we percieve political figures. Politicians use rhetoric to define who they are, and how they want us to see them. An example of this is in Eisenhower's farewell speech,he states, " To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people". Through this quote we get the image of someone striving for better, and letting nothing stand in his way. Eisenhower may or may not have been what he claimed he stood for, but my point is that he used rhetoric to portray this to the nation. He used his words to give his audience a percepetion of who he was. Many times this occurs in elections because canadates are striving to gain your support, so they become who you want them to be. This is not always who the person really is, but rhetoric is used to convince or persuade you that it is the truth.
-A.Burchel-
Rhetoric is an important factor of presidential elections and debates. Without it our political figures would seem less educated and confused.
The worlds languge is used daily, debates would not prosper without it. Politicians often use rhetoric not only for persuasion but for a cerebral connection with their audience.
~~Erin Graves~~
In our recent readings and viewings of the political landscape of the founding of our current rebuplic, I have found that rhetoric is an important aspect in politics. This is because rhetoric is the use of persuasive words and this is vital for people to use in politics.
In Antifederalist No.1 it states, “The People are the grand inquest who have a Right to judgeof its merits.” This statement indicates that rhetoric is useful in politics beacause the politicians are trying to persuade the American people to vote for them and to support them. As you can see, rhetoric is vital for politicians trying to illicit votes.
Today, Obama uses rhetoric to define the difference between himself and McCain. He does this by pointing out and saying that McCain’s policies are pretty much identical to Bush’s policies. Obama stands by his statement even though McCain claims differently and that he is a maverick. Obama uses rhetoric to convince the American people that if McCain is elected then nothing in our nation will change because of their identical policies. This persudes anti-Bush supporters to vote for Change, by voting for Obama.
-V. Gobble
Text Source: Antifederalist No.1
Internet Source: http://dailymull.com/1193/Obama-McCain-Pigs-and-Lipstick
The ultimate goal of politics is to get your vote, to win the election, and to convince people that they believe what we believe. Without politics, there would be no way for our ideas to be put into action and when we are undecided on a situation we hear other people’s views, specifically politians, this helps us create our own opinions. Politians use rhetoric to persuade us or make us think like them. They encourage us that they know what they are doing and have what is best for us in mind. We can conclude that rhetoric is the most important element of politics. If we do not have a good public speaker to campaign their ideas to us then we will not know if they believe anything similar to our own beliefs. In the Antifederalist papers No.3 it states, “That it is necessary, to prevent foreigners from dividing us, or interfering in our government, I deny positively…” These papers were used to convince the people that America needed to be a separate nation and to not allow foreign intervention because it could cause civil war and despotism.
Abraham Lincoln once said, "As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy. Whatever differs from this, to the extent of the difference, is no democracy." It was almost a one hundred year difference between when the two quotes were written and rhetoric is still a factor. Even today, with the current presidential elections rhetoric is important. Without the ability to speak we the people will not understand views of the candidates. Rhetoric influences our views of the political figure as well. If we have someone stand in front of us that does not know proper English and cannot count to 5 then clearly we will not even consider voting for them. The way a person speaks and thinks helps us understand their background and even their platform.
--Sharlese Hall
Both questions can be answered simply by stating: politics is focused on persuasion, and rhetoric is persuasion. By using pathos, logos, and ethos, politicians persuade the audience to vote for them. In making the federalist papers Hamilton tried to make a defense that the constitution would persuade many voters to stay federalist.
With statements in the Antifederalist paper #1 such as: “Their menacing cry is for a RIGID government, it matters little to them of what kind, provided it answers THAT description.” And “They cry aloud the whole must be swallow or none at all, thinking thereby to preclude any amedendment; they are afraid of having it abated of its present RIGID aspect.”, rhetoric obviously takes place by pathos to persuade the audience that the ‘zealots’ are horrible and that anti-federalism is the way to go.
¡¡¡¡¡¡Ralph Woods!!!!!!
The goal of politicians is to persuade the public to elect them into office because of their views and what they say they will do for society.Therefore, politicians have always used rhetoric and always will. Politicians use rhetoric in all its forms, pathos, ethos ,and logos to persuade their audience.The way each politician uses rhetoric and how well he or she does so affects the way we feel about them.
(not finished, will finish later)
L.Gonzalez
Back when Rhetoric first became a use of speech it became so useful that is has survived and is now used by our political figures today. I believe that todays polictical figures use the style of Rhetoric because it is such a affective type of speech. For example, In the debate of 2008 between Senators Barack Obama and John McCain both used the style of Rhetoric to debate with one another. I believed that they used the style of Rhetoric to persuade the united states citizens that ther ideas are the way to go.
In the Anti-Federalist and Federalist papers, they used Rhetoric to state how the felt on the subject of the constitution. " Compulsive or treacherous measures to establish any government whatever, will always excite jealousy among free people: better to remain single and alone, than blindly adopt whatever a few individuals shall demand, be they ever so wise". This means that the federalist believes that it is better that the government be ran by one person than having two seperate ideas. A farmer,also known as Anti- Federalist, believed that the constitution was not nessecary because they believed that there were no advantages to the constitution. " I have strong doubts whether all its advantages are not more specious than solid".
Source:
The Anti-Federalist and Federalist papers
T.Hearst ™
The conclusion I can make about rhetoric in the politics today is if we didn’t have rhetoric or if we didn’t use rhetoric there wouldn’t be any ways to really persuade the people to vote for the presidents. If the presidents didn’t have anyway of having “art of speech,” then it would just be difficult to hide the weaknesses of the candidates, and not their strong points.
Rhetoric continues to play an important factor in our elections and in our perception of political figures because, if the candidates actually used what they new they probably wouldn’t know a whole lot so they have to use like rhetoric in telling the people basically what they want to here to persuade them to vote for them. Candidates, such as, Sarah Palin seems she doesn’t know much of what she’s talking about but, with the use of rhetoric it actually seems like she is smarter in knowing about our country and “trying” to make it better.
--d.fivecoat :]
A time of Change (written in the style of Simon Armitage)
This is the news -
Not to be confused with reality,
But rather some sci-fi blockbuster or nightmare flick
Before the hero puts it all to rights -
Two dreadful flights into two uprights,
Pillars of Mammon, alters for the dead to die on.
A coffin, shaped with wings,
Crashed into an office where the receptionist was instantly vapourised,
And the fireball that took off her eyelashes before peeling away her face
Was part of a giant conspiracy to start World War Three,
Or maybe direct attention from a failing economy
Or perhaps put a pipeline across Afghanistan with the sole purpose of pumping out liquid gold.
Still, conspiracies as they go are never as strange as real life,
And whilst we mock those waiting for the Truth to emerge we quite forget that our Truth,
Though in front of our nose,
Will never be seen, usually because it’s terribly obscene.
There: let’s say it, that 2000 gone is nothing compared to millions dead
Snuffed out by wars, disease and starvation,
Whose sole monuments to life will be patchy graves in the middle of desolation,
Whose only hopes lay in a cynical world’s exploitation of them either as sweat-shop labour
Or as the recipient of that ultimate degradation,
Charity.
Let’s say it again, now blazon it on high, that the price for all our wealth
And our rich world’s grief
Are millions who anonymously die,
And that we, who beat our chests and cry know NOTHING of the real end of dreams,
Because at least our dreams have a beginning - whilst those who live in permanent grey
Can only see the world from day to day as one drab scene through which they trudge
At the bottom end of the feeding chain,
The life of the eternal drudge -
Of course, we’ve tried! - but tried what ?
Tried to be shot of nagging guilt, with monuments we have built to our generosity
Revealed as shams, a World Bank, a United Nations, gravy train meetings at frequent stations
Of the already portly caught on camera and shortly to be shown on Crime Watch U.K (if only),
Their cover blown, a criminal fraternity spending eternity going from table to table
Discussing the problems of the poor -
Whilst the poor scream of death outside the door -
This, you see, is the flaw, that no one actually, really CARES
(Until two aeroplanes catch us unawares).
To be continued - maybe……….
~~????~~~
Given in our recent viewing and readings of political landscape, rhetoric in politics is used as persuasion. For example persuasion is a way to gain and catch people attention. And helps people know who they want to vote for.
As stated in the readings of the Anti-Federalist they want to have a stronger U.S. federal government. And the Articles of Confederation gave more states authority to do things. And Federalist wanted a stronger central government and greater state rights.
NOT FINISHED WILL FINISH LATER..
♥ASIA♥
Our recent views and readings in class have helped us indentify how rhetoric is being used in politics. Rhetoric is being use in many ways during our presidential elections. One way it is being used is to persuade voters. Each presidential candidate tries to use persuasion to win the majority of the votes. They say that they can fix our economic crisis and that they can make the change that everyone has been waiting for. Another way rhetoric is being used in today’s politics is to make the opposing party look incompetent. They use rhetoric to sabotage what the opposing party has said or even to twist their speeches. This is very powerful because what people see and hear in press is mostly what they believe. In the Antifederalist papers states “The people are the grand inquest who have a right to judge of its merits” meaning in simpler words that the people are the ones who judge or vote for the better qualities but if people don’t see anything good in what a candidate has said then they mostly likely won’t vote for him/her. This makes rhetoric an essential object for getting votes and keeping them.
Rhetoric is still one of the major factors in today’s elections. One example we can give is this past presidential debate. Obama vs McCain was a very interesting debate to observe. Here in this debate, many people could observe what rhetoric they used. Obama mostly said “he is right” (referring to McCain). This made him be seen as an honest person who admits his faults. McCain on the other hand, would mostly say “you’re wrong” (referring to Obama). This made McCain be seen as a person that thinks he is always right. These things we are what mostly everyone sees. Rhetoric either helps you are makes you seem unfit. This is how I think rhetoric effects politics.
-Cindy Flores :)
Throughout history, rhetoric has been significant in politics. Political candidates use different types of rhetoric to convince voters to agree with their opinions and goals. By using rhetoric, they are able to appeal to the voters by relating these opinions to the lives of the citizens.
In the years following the creation of the United States of America, there was great controversy over centralized government and states' rights. Federalists, who believed the federal government should be granted a large amount of power, were involved with many conflicts involving Antifederalists, who argued for states' rights. These two parties used rhetoric to convince Americans to agree with their cause. In Antifederalist number 1, written on November 26, 1787, one citizen wrote, "Compulsive or treacherous measures to establish any government whatever, will always excite jealousy among a free people: better remain single and alone, than blindly adopt whatever a few individuals shall demand, be they ever so wise. I had rather be a free citizen of the small republic of Massachusetts, than an oppressed subject of the great American empire." This type of rhetoric appeals to the average American, who could relate the life of the citizen of Massachusetts to their own life.
Rhetoric is still present in politics today. Recent debates between the presidential candidates, Barack Obama and John McCain. Obama's technique is to agree with McCain, while also disagreeing with him. In response to a comment by McCain, Obama would state, "I agree with McCain, but..." By doing this, he appealed to republicans by showing that McCain may have been correct, but wrong in part of the situation. McCain used rhetoric by saying that Obama was wrong in his political views. This made Obama seem unqualified for the role of president.
Rhetoric has always been an important part of politics, and will continue to be in the future. Most of the techniques used by politicians deal with rhetoric and its ablility to persuade voters.
-e. styers
The conclusion I have made about rhetoric in politics is that it is used to persuade the people to infringe on the ideas of their opponents. The Anti-federalists used this against the federalist to gain support in opposition to the Constitution because they wanted the states to have the power. For example, a quote from Anti-federalist number one, “a spirit of inquiry burst the band of constraint upon the subject of the new plan for considering the governments of the United States…” which means that the Federalists want everyone to agree with the Constitution without knowing the contents within it. Now rhetoric is still used in politics today in speeches, debates, and campaigns. For example, Barack Obama in the debate against John McCain kept quoting; “I agree with McCain, but…” which means agrees with part of his statements, but there still needs to be a changing. By doing this, he will try to sway the border-line voters to vote for him.
Malcom King Ivery
The use of rhetorics in politics are used to to persuade their audience and sabotage their opposing party. Both political parties use negative examples to make the audience believe that he/she is unfit for a political position.
Rhetoric continues to be a factor in our elections and in our perceptions of political figures because it gives people an opinion of each candidate. In Antifederalist No. I, “In order to deceive them, they incessantly declare that none can discover any defect in the system but bankrupts who wish no government , and officers of the present government who fear to lose a part of their power.” This tells that the Antifederalists said that the Federalists are too powerful . Federalist No.84 mentions, “And the proposed Constitution, if adopted, will be the bill of rights of the Union.” This mentions that the Federalist does not want any change in the government.
In modern day politcal rhetorics, the same strategy is still used. To persuade an audience and sabotage their opponents. For an example, Obama said in the 9-26-08 Presidential debate, “…a health care system that is broken, energy polices that are not working, because, you know, 10 days ago, John said that the fundamentals of the economy are sound.” This quote directly attacks McCain and at the same time, persuades the citizens that McCain is not responsible in the economy.
--T.Xiong
In history, especially Politics, rhetoric is used as persuasion to gain voters to their political party. Throughout time, it has always been used as a "tool" because persuasion attracts peoples attention. Therefore, affects the way, and who they vote for.
In the early years of the United States, controversy was caused involving a strong central government, and government being opposed, therefore the states having greater state rights. Antifederalist which opposed a strong central government and wanted greater state rights, however, Federalist wanted a strong central government. This used rhetoric by persuasion, to gain americans to one side. For example, the Antifederalist stated, "The PEOPLE are the grand inquest who have a RIGHT to judge of its merits....They have strived to overawe or seduce printers to stifle and obstruct a free discussion, and have endeavored to hasten it to a decision before the people can duty reflect upon its properties." This is shown to elaborate why they opposed a strong central government, and wanted stronger state rights.
In comparison, this still applies to politics today. Such as, the recent debates, presidents and vice presidents have had, or are having. They decide on what they think would be right in America, and gain voters by doing so. They use persuasion such as Obama getting the voters of the Rebulicans by saying, "I agree with McCain but..." Persuasion is a main key in politics because it not only gains the votes of the people, but also gives them technique to eventually gain what they want.
ashley lauren bayse
In our recent readings of the Antifederalist paper No. 1, it is appearant that he uses rhetoric as a means of persuading the people to consider the content of the doctrines that would give the federal government all of the power. He uses rhetoric to speak against those who were in favor of adopting the doctrines immediately, or as Antifederalist number one says "cramming it down the throats of the people", for reasons that they did not wish for people to contemplate about the actual content.
The use of rhetoric has continued to be a continuing facter in elections and in the perceptions of political figures by the people, through the unchanging ways that speech is used to persuade the people in the ways that politicians wish to persuade them.
~Robert Gray
Our recent readings have focused primarily on politics and political figures, wether they were politicians from history or political figures from current times.
I think that politicians use rhetotic in a very simple way. They normally tend to only talk about the things that make them look better. They focus on all the positive issues for themselves and all the negativities of their opponent. Rhetoric is just a means of them to connect with the audience, somewhat in an emotinal way where the audience can be irrational. In Sarah Palin’s speech to the RNC she says “To the families of special-needs children all across this country, I have a message: For years, you sought to make America a more welcoming place for your sons and daughters. I pledge to you that if we are elecetd, you will have a friend and advocate in the white house.” She talks about this to influence those voters that have children or a loved one with a special need in order for them to see that even the Vice president has an issue and she can relate to us. Obviously she says this to really get the audience to feel that she’s just like them, one of the “commonfolk” as she likes to say.
Politicians also use rhetoric as a means of persuasion. They have to be careful with the words they use and how they use them in order to influence our thinking. Obviously, they want us to believe that what they’re telling us is right and the best thing for us. They want us to agree with them and believe what they tell us is exactly right.
Resource: Sarah Palin's speech to the RNC
-Uroosa Haider
*sorry it's late, i thought i posted it on friday after school but i forgot.
Post a Comment