The Trump-Clinton 2016 Presidential Debates: A Critical Discourse Analysis

Abstract

This study highlights the relation between language, power, and politics through a detailed critical discourse analysis (CDA) of selected extracts from the transcripts of the three debates between the two nominees for the 2016 American presidential elections: Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Through investigating their language choices, the study aims to uncover their ‘hidden’ ideologies regarding a number of issues that were brought up in the debates, as well as the creative strategies they have used to persuade the voters and gain their support. The study adopts an eclectic approach within CDA combining Machin and Mayr's (2012) model of CDA and Culpeper's (2011) model of impoliteness. The researcher applies CDA tools to reveal Clinton and Trump’s hidden ideologies, their use of language for persuasion namely; pragmatic representational strategies, lexical choices of (power and identity), pronouns (Us versus Them), modality and hedging, transitivity and verbal processes, and rhetorical devices. Culpeper's (2011) impoliteness model is utilized to unveil these politicians' unprecedented use of language of aggression and impoliteness seeking persuasion. Consequently, these features will reveal the overall strategies that Clinton and Trump used to persuade the Americans and gain their trust