Abstract
Since the 2016 U.S. presidential election, research on Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s linguistic styles has witnessed an exponential increase, with a lopsided focus on Trump in particular. This study compared Clinton’s and Trumps’ campaign speeches during the general election using a corpus-based approach. Discourse analysis of the corpora was conducted using the textual analysis software AntConc 3.2.4. The results showed that Clinton used a more diverse vocabulary compared with Trump, and that both candidates stuck to their core campaign messages in their speeches. Three major differences between Clinton’s and Trump’s linguistic styles were identified: 1) Clinton was inclined towards rational discussions of public policy, while Trump was adept at appealing to voters’ emotions; 2) Clinton was more positive and focused on her vision of the future, while Trump was more negative and fixated at depicting a dystopian reality; 3) Clinton aimed to find commonalities with the American people, while Trump aimed to highlight differences between himself and his opponents. By putting Clinton’s rhetoric on a par with Trump’s, this study highlighted their linguistic style differences as part of their grand campaign strategy, which could contribute to current understanding of the two candidates’ rhetorical preferences, political beliefs and strategies in their 2016 campaigns.
Highlights
In 2016, the world witnessed a historic election unfold in the United States, an election that would carry either the first female president into the White House, or a president who had no prior experience in public office and who constantly broke long-standing political norms
The results showed that Clinton used a more diverse vocabulary compared with Trump, and that both candidates stuck to their core campaign messages in their speeches
Three major differences between Clinton’s and Trump’s linguistic styles were identified: 1) Clinton was inclined towards rational discussions of public policy, while Trump was adept at appealing to voters’ emotions; 2) Clinton was more positive and focused on her vision of the future, while Trump was more negative and fixated at depicting a dystopian reality; 3) Clinton aimed to find commonalities with the American people, while Trump aimed to highlight differences between himself and his opponents
Summary
In 2016, the world witnessed a historic election unfold in the United States, an election that would carry either the first female president into the White House, or a president who had no prior experience in public office and who constantly broke long-standing political norms. Among the myriad explanations was a focus on Trump’s rhetoric in relation to his victory, as Trump behaved differently, and spoke differently from previous political candidates. Insights into his rhetoric might shed light on his triumph. Montgomery (2016) argued that Trumps’ populist appeals in his campaign speeches, while alienating some voters, may have won him support in other portions of the electorate. These studies provide some initial evidence that Trump’s rhetoric, among other things, may have played a significant role in the 2016 election
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
