Presidential rhetoric's visual turn: Performance fragments and the politics of illusionism

This essay explores the aesthetic and rhetorical implications of prudent and imprudent presidential performance fragments embodied in photo‐opportunities, thereby addressing presidential rhetoric's “visual turn. “Assembled as a critical rhetoric text, this essay posits that presidential performance fragments privilege the dominant ideology and its power relationships. In addition, this project argues that prudent presidential performances signal a chief executive's consubstantiality with the mythic presidency, centralized authority, and active political leadership. Imprudent photo‐opportunity performances, by contrast, impact negatively a president's image, agenda, credibility, and authority. The essay concludes with a discussion of how political images symbolically affect the citizenry and democratic processes, and advances foundational issues for the critic.     

When style obscures substance: Visual attention to display appropriateness in the 2012 presidential debates

As with the first televised debates in 1960, the 2012 US presidential debates accentuated the importance of nonverbal behavior in political competition, with President Obama receiving widespread criticism for his disengaged and arguably inappropriate communication style in the first debate. To investigate the perceptual impact of such nonverbal expectancy violations, this study first employs an experimental design to examine the consequence of inappropriate leader displays, operationalized as nonverbal behaviors that are incongruent with the rhetorical setting. Theoretical explanations about the evaluative consequences of inappropriate leader displays are described in light of expectancy violations theory. Results of a repeated measures eye-tracking experiment find support for the prediction that inappropriate facial expressions increase visual attention on the source of violation, prompt critical scrutiny, and elicit negative evaluations. These findings are further explored with qualitative analysis of focus group responses to key moments from the first and third presidential debates. The discussion considers the broader implications of nonverbal communication in politics and how expressive leader displays serve as meaningful cues for citizens when making sense of televised political encounters.     

Rhetorical criticism of political myth: From Goldwater legend to Reagan mystique

This essay identifies the American Western myth and the myth of the birth of the nation as political myths depicted by Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan in their 1964 and 1980 presidential campaigns respectively. While Goldwater and Reagan rely on the Western myth through 1964 to “define” America and promote political beliefs, Reagan joins the Western myth with the myth of the birth of the nation after Goldwater's resounding defeat to provide a rhetorical ground for moderating his political views and broadening his audience. In the essay, a model of political myth based on form and function is described and then applied to three addresses, one by Goldwater and two by Reagan. Analysis of the speeches reveals a symbiotic relationship between the Western myth and the birth myth that joins individuality with community in a heroic tale of America's growth as a nation. It also shows that Reagan's rhetoric expresses this symbiosis while Goldwater's does not.     

Presidential silence,C. Everett Koop,and the surgeon general's report on AIDS

On October 22, 1986, C. Everett Koop released the Surgeon General's Report on Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome. This essay examines that report as a rhetorical watershed in the national dialogue about AIDS. We suggest that this report—and the media attention that attended it—dramatically shifted the socio‐political environment concerning AIDS and contextual‐izfd Reagan's silence concerning the disease as a lack of presidential leadership on the issue.     

Social Media and Political Disengagement Among Young Adults: A Moderated Mediation Model of Cynicism,Efficacy, and Social Media Use on Apathy

To examine the role of social media use in the process of political disaffection, a web survey of young adults was conducted prior to the 2012 U.S. presidential election. Results showed that the positive relationship between cynicism and apathy was weaker for respondents who paid greater attention to social media for political information. Also, the indirect relationship between cynicism and apathy through external political efficacy was weaker for those who paid greater attention to social media for political information. We discuss implications for the role of social media in political disaffection.     

Candidate-Issue Positioning in the Context of Presidential Debates

This paper presents an analysis of three presidential candidates, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and Ross Perot, who participated in the 1992 presidential debates. The relationships among the three candidates and between each candidate and the issues were examined using semantic network analysis. The results indicate a two-against-one strategy that was issue specific. The candidates teamed up in different pairs, depending on the topic at hand. The results also show the issues that the candidates emphasized most. Specifically, Clinton and Perot had more focused communication consistent with their respective campaign themes of domestic and financial concerns, while Bush did not emphasize any one particular theme. The implications of these differences are discussed, as are the theoretical and practical implications for debater tactics and the strategic use of language for emphasizing political platforms.     

Candidate-Issue Positioning in the Context of Presidential Debates

This paper presents an analysis of three presidential candidates, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and Ross Perot, who participated in the 1992 presidential debates. The relationships among the three candidates and between each candidate and the issues were examined using semantic network analysis. The results indicate a two-against-one strategy that was issue specific. The candidates teamed up in different pairs, depending on the topic at hand. The results also show the issues that the candidates emphasized most. Specifically, Clinton and Perot had more focused communication consistent with their respective campaign themes of domestic and financial concerns, while Bush did not emphasize any one particular theme. The implications of these differences are discussed, as are the theoretical and practical implications for debater tactics and the strategic use of language for emphasizing political platforms.     

Epideictic and deliberative strategies in opposition to war: The paradox of honor and expediency

This essay examines the dissent of two major congressional opponents of war in the modern age: Senators Robert F. Kennedy and Sam Nunn. It advances the argument that, like presidential discourse advocating military action, congressional dissent can be understood in terms of appeals to honor and expediency. Such a framework elucidates the rhetorical dynamics between presidents and Congress and facilitates an understanding of the continuing rhetorical failure of the congressional branch on issues of war and peace.     

No Jack Kennedy: Mitt Romney's “Faith in America” Speech and the Changing Religious-Political Environment

In December of 2007, Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney traveled to Texas to give an address on religion and politics. The speech was heralded by many as Romney's “JFK moment.” This study explores the campaign religion speeches of Kennedy and Romney by considering various issues concerning context, audience, and content of the two speeches. Guiding this analysis is Roderick Hart's work on the civil-religious contract and Kenneth Burke's work on dramatistic analysis, which are utilized to demonstrate that—despite the media's proclamations—Romney's speech represented a stark shift from Kennedy's rhetorical approach. Implications are drawn concerning the differences between the two speeches and an understanding of the confessional political style guiding the intersection of religion and politics today.     

A Trickster-Like Woman: Subversive Imagining and Narrating of Social Change

The rich diversity among women has long challenged feminist rhetorical study to go beyond essentialism and universalism. Current feminist rhetorical study commits itself to theoretical pluralism, political inclusiveness, and the democratic values of equality for all peoples. However, the attention to the difference-between women and the simultaneity of oppressions has also fragmented women's identity and their social-change agenda. The essay performs a rhetorical analysis of a feminist text, in which a new position of women as trickster-like figures is introduced. The essay concludes that the open and shifting locations taken by trickster-like figures warrant trickster discourse to be the dynamic, open, and radical narrative form needed for the feminist social-change agenda. As such, trickster discourse, along with trickster-like figures, can have significant implications for feminist praxis and theorizing.     

Issue competition and presidential debates in multiparty systems: evidence from the 2002, 2007, and 2012 Korean presidential elections

Which issues do political parties emphasize in campaigns? Selecting the issues to emphasize in campaigns is treated with the same importance as policy positioning. Nevertheless, little attention has been paid to understanding parties’ strategies of issue competition in presidential elections under multiparty systems. By analyzing statements of presidential candidates in the 2002, 2007, and 2012 Korean presidential debates, we find that presidential candidates use their issue emphasis strategies differently in presidential elections according to party size and ideological relationships with other parties. Specifically, a small party’s candidates have been more likely than mainstream parties’ candidates to pursue their issue ownership advantage. In addition, a mainstream party’s candidates have emphasized the issues of a small party more than those of his own party when the two parties have had a similar ideological foundation, whereas, when there were no such ideological similarities, a mainstream party’s candidate has only focused on issues of the mainstream party. Our results imply that the political communication used by political parties and candidates is conditioned not only by political contexts such as electoral systems or party systems but also by the size and ideology of parties.     

Parental mediation during the U.S. 2016 presidential election campaign: How parents criticized,restricted, and co-viewed news coverage

Presidential election campaigns provide opportunities for parents to socialize their children to become politically engaged citizens. However, news coverage of the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign contained inappropriate content, leading parents to possibly restrict or denigrate rather than encourage child campaign news consumption. This study built on literatures in political socialization and parental mediation to explore mediation of campaign news coverage. Data from a representative sample of American parents during the Autumn of 2016 revealed that co-viewing, active mediation, and restrictive mediation were relatively common. The predictors of mediation included political variables, parenting orientations, and child factors, with the latter two often interacting with one another. The results have implications for how we conceptualize both political socialization and parental mediation.     

Contractualism,Committalism, and Covenantalism: A Worldview Dimensional Analysis of Human Relating

Throughout the literature much of the research on political campaign debates has focused on presidential debates and has largely ignored non‐presidential debates, particularly those featuring candidates competing in mixed‐gender races. The purpose of this study is to draw attention to these non‐presidential debates and particularly those in which gender may play a pivotal role. Through our analysis of four debates—two gubernatorial and two U.S. Senate debates—we advance the notion of debatestyle as a useful analytic scheme to examine the verbal content of female and male candidate debate dialogue. While few differences in female and male debatestyles ultimately emerged, results of the current study indicate that female and male political candidates, when engaged in debate, adopt a strategy of gendered adaptiveness that offers important contributions to both research on political debates as well as research on gender and politics.     

The two faces of Jimmy Carter: The transformation of a presidential debater, 1976 and 1980

Brydon offers a rhetorical analysis and evaluation of Jimmy Carter's debating in two elections. He concludes that Carter reversed his strategies between the two elections, attacking in 1976 but relying upon his incumbency in 1980. The findings indicate that presidential debates are ill‐suited to strategies which rely upon symbols of incumbency.     

Cocoon Minorities: Understanding Rush Limbaugh's Co-option of the Rhetorical Strategies of the Disenfranchised Position Through Homological Analysis

Conceptualizing minority social and political groups calls for careful consideration of power, prestige, and numerical systems. However, when members of empowered groups self-identify as disenfranchised, they create unique rhetorical situations. Through homological analysis of the rhetorical tactics of Rush Limbaugh matched with an analysis of Sandra Fluke's rhetorical strategies, we assert that subtle co-option of communication tactics poses larger questions about self-identification of individuals as minority members within social and political systems.     

The emergent genre of campaign e-mail in the 2008 presidential nomination campaign

This study describes e-mail use in the 2008 U.S. presidential nomination campaigns. A content analysis and rhetorical analysis of over 1,400 e-mails from the primary season of that campaign reveal evidence of typification. Consistent practices and shared purposes are evident in the campaign e-mails, along with shared and individual variations indicating an emergent communicative form. In-group identification pairs with interactive, supporter behaviors to make up the dominant constellations-of-practice within this corpus.     

French and Feminine: Hegemonic Masculinity and the Emasculation of John Kerry in the 2004 Presidential Race

French leaders met the September 2002 announcement of preemptive U.S. military action in Iraq with open disapproval. Thereafter, in the build-up to the “Iraq war,” as U.S. military strikes began in 2003 and continued in 2004, France became the target of nationalistic attacks in the United States. Building on this anti-French sentiment, George W. Bush's 2004 presidential campaign used narratives that cast Frenchness as feminine, assigning “Frenchness” to Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry—and thereby characterizing him as unfit for the White House. Specifically, political conservatives sought to strip Kerry of the masculine qualities perceived necessary to serve as president of the United States. Analysis of American political and media discourse from September 2002 to November 2004 shows that the 2004 presidential campaign came to be defined in substantial part by nationalistic and sexist political communications that capitalized upon and reinscribed patterns and norms of hegemonic masculinity while also feminizing and devaluing dissent in times of war.     

Examining verbal style in presidential campaign spots

Presidential candidates rely on political television spots to communicate their messages to voters, and the language used in spots conveys the verbal style of the candidate. This analysis of 1267 presidential spot units from 1952 through 1996 uses computerized content analysis to identify the presence of verbal style previously identified by Roderick Hart: optimism, realism, activity, and certainty. Findings show different patterns for different presidential candidates, but overall trends suggest that optimism, realism, and certainty has been decreasing. Differences in verbal style for political parties, incumbents and challengers, and winners and losers are also explored.     

No Joke: A Comparison of Substance in The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and Broadcast Network Television Coverage of the 2004 Presidential Election Campaign

This study examined substantive political coverage of the first presidential debate and the political conventions in 2004 on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and the broadcast television networks' nightly newscasts. The study found the networks' coverage to be more hype than substance and coverage on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart to be more humor than substance. The amount of substantive information in The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and the broadcast network newscasts was the same, regardless of whether the unit of analysis was news stories about the presidential election campaign or the entire half-hour program.