Joe Biden Research Articles

PUTIN AND BIDEN’S SPEECHES ON THE RUSSIAN INVOLVEMENT IN UKRAINE: DIALOGUE AND POLEMICS

Throughout the world’s long tradition with war, it has often been raised as a question whether any war was worth waging, and if so, when and how? The reply to this philosophical maze of extreme convictions differs depending on whom you ask. In this present article, we tackled the ideological differences that lead to the discrepancies between answers given by Russia and the United States of America. For this, we took as primary sources the speeches of 24 February 2022 that Vladimir Putin and Joe Biden made on Russia’s immediate involvement in Ukraine. We tried to look for dialogic clash over the choice of diction as a major ideological stance, relying on Michael Bakhtin’s theory of dialogism and his notions of hidden polemics and parody to illustrate the condemnation of the war on one end and its justification on the other. The aim was to extrapolate the themes tackled and their sequence by referring to the just war theory in its three divisions jus ad bellum, jus in bello, and jus post bellum which together structure the ancient practice of the art of war in its distinct phases. Biden and Putin heavily bid on these notions to give their viewpoints legal and ethical legitimacy and convince the international community of their just causes. Through this study, we found that the presidents stylized their speeches to follow each other’s, giving responses in an implicit and tacit manner, which we uncovered as hidden polemics in their styles of diction. We have also discovered that both presidents evoked their nemesis’ violation of the just war theory and defended their own just cause and respect for international regulation. This study falls within the field of discourse analysis that is a key element in understanding politics on the levels of presidential speeches.

The (vice) presidential pivot? Examining Kamala Harris's messaging before and after the 2022 midterms

AbstractAspirational vice presidents need to continuously support the president yet still make a name for themselves for future elections. To understand how US VP Kamala Harris attempted to communicatively enact this balance, this study content‐analyzed Harris's official VP and personal Twitter/X accounts leading up to and following the 2022 midterms to determine how she shifted her message emphases before and after the elections and across officeholder and personal accounts. Results indicate she played her “party role” pre‐midterms and “executive branch role” post‐midterms, championed Joe Biden and Democrats but not herself, and used her personal account for campaigning.

Scientific expertise and public engagement in science policy: A conversation with Dr. Alondra Nelson

MIT Science Policy Review spoke with Dr. Alondra Nelson about the role of scientists and the broader public in shaping policy. Dr. Nelson is the Harold F. Linder Professor in the School of Social Science at the Institute of Advanced Study, an independent research center in Princeton, New Jersey, and is the author of multiple works about the intersections of science, technology, medicine, and inequality, including Body and Soul (2011) and The Social Life of DNA (2016). She previously served as Deputy Assistant to President Joe Biden and acting director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). As a distinguished senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, she has advised at various levels of government and civil society on science-related issues. Dr. Nelson’s unique perspective as a sociologist sheds light on the importance of public participation in policy development, both as a democratic process, and to ensure that scientific and technological progress benefits society. In our conversation, we discussed some of the challenges of science policymaking, strategies to enhance public involvement in policy, and the fundamental value of providing broad public access to science and scientific education.

The Joe Biden administration s decision to withdraw from Afghanistan and the dominance of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (Taliban): Plans and Strategies

Despite the fact that America had spent a lot of money since 2001 and after the collapse of the Taliban to advance the project of nation-building in Afghanistan; but this militant group was able to take over Kabul again on August 15, 2021.The action of the Taliban in Afghanistan was accepted at a time when Joe Biden had determined his new policy towards Afghanistan based on the withdrawal of America from this country; for this reason, many experts should know that the control of the Taliban is the result of the government's policy, which was followed by Trump before. However, another question and concern that was raised at this time was whether the steps should be taken in relation to the withdrawal of the United States from a pre-determined regional plan with specific goals and foundations, or whether it was just at the top to reduce America's foreign spending and on the basis of partisanship. Did the democratic government accept this incident? The authors of this research have tried to compare these two views based on the method of case study. The result of this study shows that despite the existence of two main views on foreign policy, different components and variables should be included in the strategy for Afghanistan, which is a multi-faceted approach. This multi-factor approach has been presented by the authors in the end.

Designing a Billionaire's Tax

With ProPublica’s dramatic revelation in 2021 of the low “true tax rates” of America’s billionaires serving as a catalyst, the exclusion of unrealized gains from the base of the federal income tax has been challenged to an extent unprecedented in the century-plus history of the tax. In late 2021, a proposal by Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden (D, OR) to tax billionaires’ unrealized gains in tradable assets might have become law, but for the opposition of Senator Joe Manchin (D, WV). And in early 2022, the Treasury Department of President Joe Biden included a minimum tax on the unrealized gains of the ultrarich in its tax reform proposals. A narrower reform, taxing billionaires who borrow against unrealized appreciation to finance lavish consumption expenditures, has also been urged. All three of these proposed reforms—but especially the first two—would transform the fundamental character of the income tax as applied to the wealthiest Americans. This Article describes the three approaches, considers design challenges under each and evaluates their relative merits.

The Analysis of President Biden's Twitter Account's Representative Illocutionary Act

Representative illocutionary acts are speech acts that convey truth values based on the actual meaning of the spoken or written utterances. This research aims to identify the types and purposes of representative illocutionary acts contained in President Biden's Twitter account. The present research is grounded in John R. Searle's theory, which posits that a representative illocutionary act refers to a statement made by a speaker that is believed to be either true or untrue, depending on a prior event witnessed by the speaker. This study employs a qualitative research methodology. The subject of investigation in this research consists of President Biden's tweets, which are utilized as the primary data source. The statements are classified and examined based on the categories of representative illocutionary acts and their roles. The research findings identify various types of representative illocutionary acts that serve distinct roles based on their respective types. The act of recommending, as a typical illocutionary act, holds a significant impact due to Joe Biden's position as the president of a mighty nation. As the leader of a country with substantial capital, advanced industry, and a formidable military, Biden wields considerable global influence. Hence, the tweets of President Biden are not only monitored by American citizens but also by global citizens. Furthermore, President Biden's statements are currently a prominent global concern. President Biden frequently offers recommendations to the citizenry, who are an audience impacted by various issues or challenges, to resolve them.Keywords: Illocutionary Act; President Biden; Representative Act; Twitter Account.

An Approach to the Rhetoric of Boebert and Díaz-Ayuso’s Political Tweets on X: A Corpus-Assisted Analysis

This article presents a corpus-assisted analysis of the rhetoric employed in the political tweets of Lauren Boebert and Isabel Díaz-Ayuso on the micro-blogging site X (formerly Twitter). This study adopts the analytical framework Appraisal Theory (Martin & White, 2005), to explore how these politicians utilize negativity as a strategic tool to discredit and weaken their adversaries. The research identifies key motifs and evaluative strategies within their tweets, illustrating the role of negativity in political discourse. Findings reveal that both politicians direct their negativity toward their political rivals, viz., presidents Joe Biden and Pedro Sánchez, while channeling it towards immigrants and independentist parties. Amongst the evaluative resources most commonly deployed, Lauren Boebert and Isabel Díaz-Ayuso utilize inscribed negative judgments of propriety and veracity to accuse their rivals based on their lack of morality and truthfulness regarding various policy issues. The qualitative study has also revealed that politicians present their stances through monoglossic formulations that leave no room for argumentation and debate. This idea reinforces that even if their negativity is not intended as a polarizing agent, it may affect the potential electorate. This study contributes to understanding the dynamics of online political communication, highlighting the implications of negativity in shaping public opinion and political narratives.

The politicization of CIA intelligence: Four cases compared

The political activism of current and former employees of the Central Intelligence Agency before and during the presidency of Donald Trump has been widely observed but not compared to previous episodes of politicization of intelligence by CIA personnel. Organizational cultural norms that long proscribed political activism by CIA employees eventually encouraged it. Societal trends account for some of the evolution, but much reflects purposeful engineering by President Barack Obama and his appointees. These changes, amplified by President Joe Biden, are likely to lead to renewed activism in the future—damaging national security and public confidence in the CIA.

Exploring Speech Act Patterns In Anthropological Pragmatics

The purpose of this paper is to look into discourse patterns of President Joe Biden from an anthropological pragmatics perspective, and the theory of speech acts, in particular. I will argue that speech acts are double-edged tools in human communication that have the power to create objective facts accepted and maintained by human agreement on the one hand but are also determined by fluctuating socio-cultural context. In exploring the topic of the American presidency from an anthropological pragmatics perspective, this article addresses theoretical and methodological issues which further our understanding of linguistic structure of social reality determined by socially constrained functions that underlie culture. Thus, this paper argues for a broadened research path to advance the theory of speech acts in political discourse. An analysis of President Joe Biden’s language practices uncovers the rhetorical concept of ethos and its criterion of credibility that is indicative of his presidential status.

A Stylistic Analysis of Joe Biden's Inaugural Political Speech

In this paper, a stylistic approach has been used to investigate the linguistic features of President Joe Biden's inauguration political speech. Special importance is given to its linguistic characteristics that affect the structure of the selected political speech. This paper is an attempt to highlight the political language of Biden’s political speech. The aim is to seek out how political speeches are packaged to persuade citizens and readers and how stylistic analytical tools assist readers in interpreting the language of Biden in the selected speech. The data has been collected from Time Magazine. The data selection is restricted to Biden's inauguration political speech and has been chosen based on certain foregrounding features that indicate a powerful stylistic effect on readers. The qualitative method has been used to analyze the selected data. In the analysis, some linguistic features, such as graphological, syntactic, grammatical deviations, transitivity, and modality have been used to investigate the style of the selected speech to reveal persuasion. The findings show that Biden's inauguration political speech achieves power, and persuasion through the use of certain stylistic features including lexical and grammatical categories such as abstract nouns, personal pronouns, mental processes, and certain modal auxiliaries. It is concluded that the lexical items that Biden uses are crucial in passing his message to his nation. However, the tendency to use distinctive foregrounding features in the consistent repetition of lexical items and sentence structures are stylistic technique used by Biden for the sake of persuasion.

Syntactic and Rhetorical Analysis of Joe Biden’s Inaugural Speech at Washington D.C.

Inaugural speech is the first chance for a president to engage the public in new strategies for success. Every inaugural speech is an example of the aims and objectives of the future. As president of America, Joe Biden has faced many challenges, including foreign affairs, a poor economy due to COVID-19, and, most importantly, American unity. The focus of the present investigation is to lead a stylistic examination from the viewpoint of syntax and rhetoric on Joe Biden's inaugural speech in Washington,D.C., on January 21, 2021. The researchers discovered that the speech is full of rhetorical and syntactic devices. The analysis revealed that the speech emphasized on unity and solidarity to preserve and promote American Identity through the excessive use of First-person pronouns and planned use of similes, repetitions, modality and conjunction. In this way, Biden made his speech productive and readily revealed his plans and motives to his audience.

ASSERTIVE ACT IN JOE BIDEN’S FIRST INTERVIEW AS PRESIDENT ON THE 60 MINUTES YOUTUBE CHANNEL

This research examines the assertive acts employed by Joe Biden during his first interview as President on the 60 Minutes YouTube Channel. Using Searle & Vanderveken’s theory of speech acts, the study adopts a qualitative descriptive approach. Data collection involved watching videos, reading the transcript, and note-taking. The analysis identified 20 utterances which are categorized into eight types of assertive acts: admit, assure, claim, criticize, inform, rebut, report, and predict. The most frequently used of assertive act was “inform”, with 7 utterances, followed by "assure" with 3 utterances. Other acts such as “report”, “predict”, “claim”, and “admit” each appeared twice, while “criticize” and "rebut" were used once each. The study found that all assertive acts, except "criticize," were conveyed directly and literally. In conclusion, Joe Biden conveyed assertive acts by utilizing direct speech and literal meanings to effectively convey his message, particularly in assuring the public of his plans to address the COVID-19 pandemic.

Persuasive Through Ethos, Logos, and Pathos in BTS' Speech at The White House

Race is the diversity given by God Almighty. Race can be understood as the distinctive characteristics of a nation in groups based on different physical characteristics. This difference is a beautiful thing because humans do not only consist of one group, but also various groups with differences that can complement one another. Unfortunately, in the reality of social life, there is still discrimination against certain races with different physical forms from the majority in a region. The United States is an example of a country that has the highest level of racism in the world. The Asian-American race often experiences acts of racism that result in fatalities. BTS, a band from South Korea, became the representative of Asians invited by Joe Biden to speech at The White House to express their concern about hate crimes. The purpose of this study is to analyze BTS' speech regarding racial issues towards Asians at The White House from the perspective of Rhetorical theory using the elements of ethos, logos, and pathos. The speech reflected the reality of racism towards Asian ethnic groups, as well as a solution to end this problem by fighting racism at all levels of society. This research uses the interview method by collecting primary and secondary data from relevant books, journal articles, and websites to analyze the Rhetoric speech by BTS in order to get accurate results. The implications of the results of this study include improving Rhetoric not only used in Political occasions but can be used for anyone like BTS did from an entertainment background.

Climate migrations as a subject of the American national security policy

This article draws attention to the growing importance of climate migration as a subject of national security. The United States of America (USA) was cited as a global leader upon which the international community places its hopes in combating climate change. With this in mind, an analysis was conducted on the institutional and normative actions of the American administration during the presidency of Joe Biden, which were a direct response to the effects of the climate crisis. These actions show the increased involvement of the USA administration in trying to define climate migration as a serious national security problem. In the article, we argue that with the change in the presidency in 2021, there was an increased commitment to climate migrants accompanied by a growing awareness of climate change. In the analysis of the cognitive problem, research methods characteristic of the following sciences were used: political (decision-making method), legal (dogmatic method), and historical sciences. The article is descriptive and explanatory.

Racial resentment, sexism, and evaluations of Kamala Harris in the 2020 U.S. presidential election

AbstractObjectiveThis article examines the effect of racial attitudes and sexism on evaluations of Kamala Harris. It also compares the effect of these variables on evaluations of other Democratic politicians: Joe Biden, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton.MethodsData are taken from the 2020 American National Election Studies, using feeling thermometers for Harris, Biden, and Obama, and from the 2016 American National Election Studies for Clinton. Our primary independent variables are racial resentment and three measures of sexism: modern, hostile, and traditional sexism.ResultsRacial resentment, modern sexism, and traditional sexism exerted an effect on evaluations of Kamala Harris above and beyond other explanatory variables, including party identification and ideology. However, these effects did not differ considerably from those found for Biden, Obama, and Clinton.ConclusionsRacial resentment and sexism appear to be related to evaluations of any Democratic presidential or vice presidential nominee, reflecting how they have become salient in defining party identities. We speculate, however, that their effects might be even more visible for black women at the top of a presidential ticket, and provide major headwinds into which Kamala Harris may have to run when contemplating any future presidential candidacy of her own.

Is Vladimir Putin a Realist with Special Attention to the Concept of a Force Monopoly and Hans Kelsen’s Principle of Effectiveness of Laws and Joe Biden’s (President of the United States of America) Speech at the United Nations General Assembly Meeting of 20th September, 2023 That There Will Be Reprisal against Russia for Starting the War with Ukraine Coincide with

Is Vladimir Putin a Realist with Special Attention to the Concept of a Force Monopoly and Hans Kelsen’s Principle of Effectiveness of Laws and Joe Biden’s (President of the United States of America) Speech at the United Nations General Assembly Meeting of 20th September, 2023 That There Will Be Reprisal against Russia for Starting the War with Ukraine Coincide with

"Watch Me"

At age eighty-one, Joe Biden is the oldest president in U.S. history. Donald Trump, his predecessor, held the same status during his term in office. When the next chief executive is inaugurated on January 20, 2025, Biden will be eightytwo years old and Trump seventy-eight. Whoever wins will be the oldest president in history. No wonder that age figures prominently in the presidential election campaign of 2024.

It’s Not Just About Age Anymore:

The U.S. presidential elections have been the site of racism, sexism, classism, ableism, and ageism among other problematic issues. While the 2024 U.S. presidential election continues to be fraught with numerous “isms” and accusations, the focus in this essay is on a new and powerful discrediting tactic: the whisper of cognitive decline. Accusations of cognitive decline not only cast doubt on a politician’s ability to think and act clearly—an unpardonable sin in leadership—but also builds on ageist stereotypes that make such accusations seem credible despite evidence. Ultimately, I argue that because Donald Trump and Joe Biden are wealthy, white, educated men of roughly similar ages, seventy-seven and eighty-one respectively, targeting their cognitive status feeds into social stigmas and fears that are difficult to counter and that, unfortunately, the harm caused by this new level of attack negatively affects older people and people living with neurocognitive disorders.

Battle for Inbox and Bucks

Despite its proven pervasiveness and effectiveness, the role of email in political campaigns has been understudied. In this article, we seek to understand the use of emails by Donald Trump's and Joe Biden's campaigns during the 2020 U.S. presidential election. Employing newly collected email data (N = 4051), we compared how the two campaign teams differ in the use of appeals in their emails, and the functions of the message (e.g., attack, acclaim). We found that, while both campaigns used emails primarily for fundraising, Trump's campaign (compared to Biden’s campaign) was more likely to use all of the four appeals we defined — material, solidarity, ideology, and issue appeals. We also found that by sending emails, Biden's campaign tends to acclaim itself more while Trump's campaign attacks opponents more.

The Power to Exclude: The (Mis)Treatment of Unaccompanied Minors under the Trump and Biden Administration

In “The Biden Plan for Securing Our Values as a Nation of Immigrants” (hereinafter “Biden Plan“), then-candidate Joe Biden promised to “reassert America’s commitment to asylum-seekers and refugees.” Three years into his presidency, how far has the Biden Administration come in their efforts to create a more humane asylum system? And has the treatment of unaccompanied minors seen any significant improvements? This article examines the Trump Administration’s attempts to permanently alter the US asylum system. After trying to categorically ban all claims that were based on persecution by “private actors,” the Trump Administration seized on the COVID-19 pandemic as a convenient pretext for taking away even some of the most basic human rights protections that asylum-seekers have enjoyed for generations. This article will argue that the Biden Administration, despite their efforts to restore some basic protections, continues to criminalize and institutionalize many unaccompanied minors.