Language in Presidential DebatesJoin now to read essay Language in Presidential DebatesLanguage was a very important tool in the 2004 presidential campaign. The way that both John Kerry and President George W. Bush used language was extremely important in this election. The way a candidate uses language can make people feel connected if used effectively and aloof is used ineffectively. There are many components of language such as word choice, vocabulary, repetition of words, and dialect used in political discourse. Each candidate used several of these components in their campaigns. I will analyze a speech from each candidate and focus on how effectively or ineffectively each candidate used language in the 2004 presidential election.
< p>How President Bush uses language is in a very different state of mind. The Republican has used language at rallies in all 50 states of this country — the “Make America Great Again!” speeches, for example. His use of language is very different. He has used language from a variety of perspectives at one time and one time only. There’s probably not much disagreement on either position, and there’s certainly no great difficulty in understanding the President’s use of language over the other. That’s important, because the President’s use of language has made the rest of America less and less concerned. In the words of the president, the election of any candidate is a momentous moment, but in the words of the President, that moment is not a momentous moment, but a day of determination to make America great again. We need to make America great.” The election of President Bush made a major difference to the way that many young people came to be educated and work in the military. In a sense, the election of President Bush was important because, by and large, it provided more opportunities for young people to learn and get jobs. It also had a positive effect on education and the economy. That educational and business support has helped fuel education and economic growth in this country. In fact, Mr. Reagan’s school reform was critical to bringing the economy back into the 21st Century. Since then, Mr. Bush has had important things to talk about. He has talked deeply about America’s role in the world and our role abroad. He spoke about America’s place in the world more articulately than it has in the past. He has made his case more forcefully on issues that matter to young people as he has also made his claims in other areas. At times, he was even more specific about issues that matter to us, such as war or the economy. He has also given an opportunity for the students of the United States to apply their best ideas to solve some key challenges of the future. Mr. Bush also took the opportunity to address some of the biggest questions that the country needs to be thinking about when it comes to the future. Among them, he touched on a very important point — “What do we learn from our past war defeats?” But I think that for me, Mr. Bush is the most relevant candidate for this particular role and that is that at his very first election he spoke specifically on this topic. We need to remember President Bush had an enormous role when it came to his war. He did it on the ground, even if that involved the use of military hardware in combat, which the United States has done very, very well. In an election campaign, Mr. Bush was in no particular position to go against or to oppose military equipment. At the time he was running, there was absolutely no question that President Bush had the capacity to do that. In fact, he also
< p>How President Bush uses language is in a very different state of mind. The Republican has used language at rallies in all 50 states of this country — the “Make America Great Again!” speeches, for example. His use of language is very different. He has used language from a variety of perspectives at one time and one time only. There’s probably not much disagreement on either position, and there’s certainly no great difficulty in understanding the President’s use of language over the other. That’s important, because the President’s use of language has made the rest of America less and less concerned. In the words of the president, the election of any candidate is a momentous moment, but in the words of the President, that moment is not a momentous moment, but a day of determination to make America great again. We need to make America great.” The election of President Bush made a major difference to the way that many young people came to be educated and work in the military. In a sense, the election of President Bush was important because, by and large, it provided more opportunities for young people to learn and get jobs. It also had a positive effect on education and the economy. That educational and business support has helped fuel education and economic growth in this country. In fact, Mr. Reagan’s school reform was critical to bringing the economy back into the 21st Century. Since then, Mr. Bush has had important things to talk about. He has talked deeply about America’s role in the world and our role abroad. He spoke about America’s place in the world more articulately than it has in the past. He has made his case more forcefully on issues that matter to young people as he has also made his claims in other areas. At times, he was even more specific about issues that matter to us, such as war or the economy. He has also given an opportunity for the students of the United States to apply their best ideas to solve some key challenges of the future. Mr. Bush also took the opportunity to address some of the biggest questions that the country needs to be thinking about when it comes to the future. Among them, he touched on a very important point — “What do we learn from our past war defeats?” But I think that for me, Mr. Bush is the most relevant candidate for this particular role and that is that at his very first election he spoke specifically on this topic. We need to remember President Bush had an enormous role when it came to his war. He did it on the ground, even if that involved the use of military hardware in combat, which the United States has done very, very well. In an election campaign, Mr. Bush was in no particular position to go against or to oppose military equipment. At the time he was running, there was absolutely no question that President Bush had the capacity to do that. In fact, he also
In order to best analyze political discourse in the 2004 presidential campaign it is important to look at the different uses of language in each candidates campaign. John Kerry used several components of language throughout his campaign. In his speech given at the Democratic National Convention many of these components were displayed. Kerry delivered the speech in Boston on the 29th of July 2004. Kerry opened his speech by giving his audience a positive message about America and its future, saying, “We are here tonight because we love our country. We are proud of what America is and what it can become” (Command). This opening is very common in political discourse, it conveys a very positive message filled with hope and also unites his audience using the pronoun “we”. Kerry also uses other language components to connect with his audience and their ideologies. Speaking about his mother, Kerry says:
She was my den mother when I was a Cub Scout and she was so proud of her fifty year pin as a Girl Scout leader. She gave me her passion for the environment. She taught me to see trees as the cathedrals of nature. And by the power of her example, she showed me that we can and must finish the march towards full equality for women in this country. (Command)
Kerry uses a powerful simile when he refers to trees as cathedrals of nature. Kerry uses word choice and vocabulary to convey his passion for the environment but by using the word cathedral he also shows his connection with religion. Kerrys word choice is very important because it helps present to his audience a candidate who is concerned with both religion and the environment. Religion and the environment were important issues in this years election. Not only did Kerry show his own concern with these issues, he also helped capture the attention of audience members who place importance on these issues. Further in his speech John Kerry tells of his plans for the oval office:
I will be a commander in chief who will never mislead us into war. I will have a Vice President who will not conduct secret meetings with polluters to rewrite our environmental laws. I will have a Secretary of Defense who will listen to the best advice of our military leaders. And I will appoint an Attorney General who actually upholds the Constitution of the United States. (Command)
Kerry starts each sentence with “I will” as opposed to “I wont”. By using “will” instead of “wont” he is conveying a more positive message. Also by using “will”, Kerry is still able to state his criticisms of the President but at the same time able to offer solutions. This particular word choice allows Kerry to camouflage his criticisms with his agenda. It also shows Kerry as a proactive leader, rather than merely stating what he wont do he tells his audience what he will do.
In the ensuing paragraph, Kerry again displays his very particular word choice and vocabulary. Speaking about his running mate John Edwards, Kerry refers to him as, “a son of a mill worker” (Command). Kerry goes out of his way to make a point of saying that John Edwards father was a mill worker. Kerry uses political discourse to identify with the middle class and the working people. When I think of mill workers I think of hard honest labor. Perhaps this is the picture Kerry was attempting to paint for his audience.
Besides word choice, John Kerry also heavily relied on repetition throughout his speech. Kerry used repetition to emphasize and highlight important concepts of his speech:
What does it mean in America today when Dave McCune, a steel worker I met in Canton, Ohio, saw his job sent overseas and the equipment in his factory literally unbolted, crated up, and shipped thousands of miles away along with that job? What does it mean when workers Ive met had to train their foreign replacements?
America can do better. So tonight we say: help is on the way.What does it mean when Mary Ann Knowles, a woman with breast cancer I met in New Hampshire, had to keep working day after day right through her chemotherapy, no matter how