Abstract
This article seeks to introduce bull and bear communicative strategies in the US election discourse. The coinage is derived from the popular images of bull and bear in the economic terms ‘bull market’ and ‘bear market’. The bull strategy focuses on positive self-presentation, while the bear strategy is aimed at negative otherpresentation. Research into US presidential debates shows that most frequent communicative strategies aim either to create and reinforce the politician’s positive image or to discredit his or her opponent and ruin their chances to win. Which of the strategies stands to be more efficient is yet a matter of argument; however it is vividly shown that these strategies provide the perfect breeding ground for discursive confrontation.
Highlights
In terms of pragmalinguistics, presidential election debates can be primarily considered as a verbal confrontation between candidates seeking to win or hold power
Confrontation, or agonism, plays a leading role in political discourse, as it is directly connected with the quest for power
Agonism emphasizes the importance of dispute, disagreement and conflict to political discourse
Summary
Presidential election debates can be primarily considered as a verbal confrontation between candidates seeking to win or hold power. Agonism emphasizes the importance of dispute, disagreement and conflict to political discourse. It represents “victory through forfeit or default, or over an unworthy opponent, which comes up short compared to a defeat at the hands of a worthy opponent – a defeat that still brings honor” [Chambers, 2001]. Of special interest for researchers are communication tactics and strategies pursued by contenders. The article examines communicative strategies and tactics pursued by George W. It is important to study communicative strategies and tactics of political discourse to better understand linguistic profiles of politicians, including their beliefs and intentions. This paper examines various approaches to strategies and tactics with the intent to find self-explanatory names of recurrent strategies in political debates. We argue that the images of bull and bear most precisely reflect the confrontational nature of political discourse
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
