Presidential Campaign Discourse Research Articles

Book review: Colleen Elizabeth Kelley, A Rhetoric of Divisive Partisanship: The 2016 American Presidential Campaign Discourse of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump

Book review: Colleen Elizabeth Kelley, <i>A Rhetoric of Divisive Partisanship: The 2016 American Presidential Campaign Discourse of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump</i>

Functional analysis of Ghanaian presidential debates

Scholars of the functional theory of campaign discourse have explored the nature of political campaign discourse, particularly presidential campaign discourse. This paper adds to the exploration and the data by analysing Ghanaian presidential debates using Benoit’s functional theory. The analysis reveals that the presidential candidates acclaimed more than they attacked and defended. Two additional functional categories – appeal and recommendation – are identified. Contrary to the assumptions of the functional theory that incumbents acclaim more than challengers, the paper finds that challengers acclaimed more than the incumbent, and that the candidates discussed more future plans/deliberative rhetoric. The study concludes that even though most of the assumptions of the theory were confirmed, there are additional persuasive strategies of presidential candidates in Ghanaian political debates such as appeal and recommendation. Thus, the study recommends that further studies extend the theory to accommodate the discourse strategies in multi-candidate campaigns since the theory emerged from several studies of two-candidate campaigns in the United States.

Аксиологическая составляющая американского предвыборного дискурса в динамическом аспекте

The article presents the results of a corpus-based analysis of axiological characteristics of political discourse. Applying the method of identifying keywords in a corpus the authors described the dynamics of the American election discourse dominant values in the period from 1952 to 2016. The research material comprised the texts of American presidential election commercials from seventeen campaigns. The texts were compiled into three corpora according to three historical periods: period I – 1952–1972; period II – 1976–2000; period III – 2004–2016. It was found that the invariant values represented in the texts of election commercials of all the historical periods are: "prosperity", "patriotism", "progress", "social justice" and "security". The listed values receive a variable linguistic expression in the texts of each period. It is shown that the evolution of the value component in the presidential campaign discourse manifests itself in the change of actors within the opposition "us – them", in variation of their linguistic representations, in modification of value dominants of discourse and in transformation of language means conveying evaluative meaning. The main set of value orientations of the discourse remains relatively constant, the changes are revealed in the model of conceptualization of the values and their influencing potential in the election communication.

Gender Performativity and Conceptual Metaphors in the Presidential Campaign Discourse: A case study from Georgia

Gender Performativity defines politicians’ verbal repertoire in accordance with the social context and expectations. Social actors construct their identities in the discourse through the work of words. Conceptual metaphors are supposed to be the cognitive models of linguistic metaphoric expressions manifested in the political discourse which tend to play a significant role in the social construction of gender. The present study focuses on the use of metaphors in two presidential candidates’ (Salome Zurabishvili and Grigol Vashadze) English interviews made during 2018 presidential election campaign in Georgia. Conceptual Metaphors: Politics is Journey, Politics is Sport and Politics is War are investigated in Salome Zurabishvili’s and Grigol Vashadze’s political speeches. The metaphoric choices the politicians make are socially determined and later on ascribed to their gender which may not be as binary as it is traditionally perceived. In today’s competitive world of politics women tend to manifest their agency through the language which is rendered masculine. Therefore, critical discourse analysis (CDA) is applied to investigate the discursive construction of gender and agency through conceptual metaphors.

Building Populist Discourse: An Analysis of Populist Communication in American Presidential Elections, 1896–2016

ObjectivesThis article examined the history of the use of populist frames in American presidential campaign discourse in order to answer a set of interrelated questions about how populist discourse is constructed and employed.MethodsUsing a novel database of presidential campaign speeches (n = 189) from 63 major candidates from 1896 to 2016, I coded these speeches for presence or absence of a set of 11 populist frames. Mokken scale analysis was conducted to determine if populist discourse is “built” in a logical way by political candidates. Regression analysis was conducted to measure if outsider candidates were more likely to employ populist framing.ResultsEight of the 11 frames comprise a stable Mokken scale that measures populist discourse. Results show that anti‐bureaucratic and nativist frames do not load onto the same factor as other populist frames, suggesting that they may be measuring a separate concept. Candidates are more likely to use generic, less threatening aspects of the populist frame than they are to use illiberal, “risky” frames. Less experienced and third‐party candidates are also more likely to use populist discourse.ConclusionPopulism is a flexible but coherent set of discursive frames present across modern campaign history. Populist framings are most commonly utilized by outsider candidates.

Коммуникативные стратегии манипулирования на примере американской избирательной кампании Д. Трампа и Х. Клинтон

The research objective includes identifying the most efficient manipulative communicative strategies and tactics in D. Trump’s and H. Clinton’s presidential campaign discourse. The article provides a brief survey of the existing views on the phenomenon of manipulative verbal influence. Scientific originality of the paper lies in the fact that the authors consider impact of manipulative strategies and tactics of pre-election discourse on a voter’s electoral choice. The conclusion is made that the verbal means of manipulative influence used by D. Trump turned out to be more efficient.

Populism in New Media: The Online Presidential Campaign Discourse in Indonesia

Populism is often seen as a tactic, strategy and method of campaigning in political communication that exploits political discourse. Populism plays a vital role in Indonesia’s 2019 presidential election. Various research has been carried out to understand the practice of populism. However, few have explained the way social media and online news in populist communication practices relate to the discourse of the online presidential campaign. This research aims to understand the pattern of the use of populist discourse in Indonesia’s 2019 presidential election in online news and social media. The study employed Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) that focuses on social identity construction and the relation of populist discourse practices. Data for the study were obtained from online news from January 15 to February 14, 2019. A total of 81 news articles from online news and 576,782 entries that are disseminated in Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube were analyzed by using Nvivo and web crawlers. This research finds that, first, political discourse and populist discourse are amplified by online news coverage and extended in the social media; second, online news does not engage in producing populist discourse but echoes the populist discourse by citing politician’s populist utterance. In conclusion, populist keywords and concepts like infrastructure, food, energy, and radical become a hegemonic discourse in Indonesia’s 2019 presidential election. There are two important contributions of this study on populist discourse in Indonesia’s 2019 election campaign. One, the knowledge of the pattern of the distribution of populist discourse. Two, the understanding about the use of populist discourse in social media and online news.

Populist linguistic tone in recent U.S. presidential campaign discourse: a DICTION analysis

ABSTRACTThis study analyzed the tone of public campaign remarks of right- and left-wing populist (Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, respectively) and right and left-wing non-populist (Mitt Romney and Hillary Clinton, respectively) U.S. presidential candidates using DICTION 7.0. Findings suggest that populists tended to use a linguistic tone that is high in pessimism, group abstractness, and exclusion. Pessimism and group abstractness were positively associated with immigration language in right-wing populist speech. Commonality and “we-ness” were positively associated with populist language in left-wing populist speech.

At War with the Chinese Economic Yellow Peril: Mitt Romney’s 2012 Presidential Campaign Rhetoric

This study examines the evolution of yellow peril tropes in a subset of US political discourse by conducting a close textual analysis of Mitt Romney’s rhetoric during the 2012 U.S. presidential campaign. I argue that Romney revised yellow peril tropes of the Chinese as immoral, ruthless scapegoats to construct China as an economic yellow peril. In turn, the threat posed by this peril is augmented by Romney’s use of anti-communist tropes, which draw upon deeply entrenched Cold War fears to position the United States and China as adversaries. This project provides insight into the functions of anti-China appeals in U.S. presidential campaign discourse.

The Populist Style in American Politics: Presidential Campaign Discourse, 1952–1996

This paper examines populist claims-making in US presidential elections. We define populism as a discursive strategy that juxtaposes the virtuous populace with a corrupt elite and views the former as the sole legitimate source of political power. In contrast to past research, we argue that populism is best operationalized as an attribute of political claims rather than a stable ideological property of political actors. This analytical strategy allows us to systematically measure how the use of populism is affected by a variety of contextual factors. Our empirical case consists of 2,406 speeches given by American presidential candidates between 1952 and 1996, which we code using automated text analysis. Populism is shown to be a common feature of presidential politics among both Democrats and Republicans, but its prevalence varies with candidates’ relative positions in the political field. In particular, we demonstrate that the probability of a candidate’s reliance on populist claims is directly proportional to his distance from the center of power (in this case, the presidency). This suggests that populism is primarily a strategic tool of political challengers, and particularly those who have legitimate claims to outsider status. By examining temporal changes in populist claims-making on the political left and right, its variation across geographic regions and field positions, and the changing content of populist frames, our paper contributes to the debate on populism in modern democracies, while integrating field theory with the study of institutional politics.

Freedom in speech: Freedom and liberty in U.S. presidential campaign discourse, 1952–2004

“Freedom” is a flexible and powerful word. When a speaker describes a soldier as a “freedom fighter,” the New Deal as a way to achieve “freedom from poverty,” or taxation as a threat to freedom, he or she implicitly identifies heroes, villains, rights, and violations of rights. To identify the ways freedom – and its close cousin “liberty” – have been used in American presidential campaign discourse, I analyzed 88 speeches from 28 Republican and Democratic presidential nominating conventions (1952–2004). This study is the first to code and categorize the variable meanings of freedom and liberty language. I found that freedom and liberty terms were most often used in reference to Communism, economic freedom, individual liberty from government, and in ways that did not reference anything specific. I identify how such freedom language may encourage particular policies, citizen identities, and national memories.

Partisan patterns in presidential campaign speeches, 1948–2000

This article investigates partisan language and its role in American political campaigns by addressing two fundamental questions: Can the differences between Democratic and Republican presidential candidates be reliably identified by a careful inspection of their speeches? and Have their speeches changed over time? In answering these questions, over 2,000 speech segments delivered by Democratic and Republican candidates over the past 14 elections (1948–2000) are examined. The data show that (1) Democratic candidates are more likely than Republicans to discuss campaign actors and to use nouns to rhetorically bring their coalitions together, (2) Republican candidates are more likely than Democrats to focus on ideals and employ a more unified, direct approach, and (3) these partisan patterns have decreased somewhat over the years in presidential campaign speeches. While this analysis provides some support for the contention that presidential campaign discourse is becoming increasingly candidate‐centered, it also reveals that major party candidates continue to adhere to some partisan rhetorical patterns in the presidential selection process.

Campaign 2000: a functional analysis of presidential campaign discourse

Chapter 1 Preface Part 2 I. Introduction Chapter 3 1. Overview: A Functional Theory of Political Campaign Discourse Chapter 4 2. Method and Procedures: Analyzing Acclaims, Attacks, and Defenses Part 5 II. Primaries Chapter 6 3. Television Spots Chapter 7 4. Debates Chapter 8 5. Web Pages Chapter 9 6. Radio Spots Chapter 10 7. Television Talk Show Appearances Part 11 III. Nominating Conventions Chapter 12 8. Featured Speakers Chapter 13 9. Acceptance Addresses Chapter 14 10. Spouses' Speeches Part 15 IV. General Election Campaign Chapter 16 11. Television Spots Chapter 17 12. Debates Chapter 18 13. Web Pages Chapter 19 14. Radio Spots Chapter 20 15. Television Talk Show Appearances Part 21 V. Conclusion and Implications Chapter 22 16. Outcomes and Implications Chapter 23 References Chapter 24 Indexes

Political party affiliation and presidential campaign discourse

This study investigates the question of whether the political party affiliation of presidential candidates influences the nature of the discourse they produce in political campaigns. Analysis of primary and general debates, primary and general television spots, and acceptance addresses from 1948 to 2000 demonstrates systematic differences between the messages invented by Republican and Democratic presidential candidates. Democrats discuss policy more, and character less, than Republicans. Democrats attack on policy more, and character less, than Republicans. Democrats emphasize Democratic issues (e.g., education) more than Republicans, whereas Republicans stress Republican issues (e.g., defense), more than Democrats. Finally, Republicans emphasize the character traits of sincerity and morality more, and empathy and drive less, than Democrats.

Issue Ownership and Presidential Campaigning, 1952–2000

Journal Article Issue Ownership and Presidential Campaigning, 1952–2000 Get access John R. Petrocik, John R. Petrocik JOHN R. PETROCIK is a professor and chair of the Political Science Department at the University of Missouri-Columbia. He works in the area of elections, public opinion, and political parties. This paper is adapted from a book-length project on issue-ownership in American national politics. Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar William L. Benoit, William L. Benoit WILLIAM L. BENOIT is a professor of communication at the University of Missouri-Columbia. He has written five books on presidential campaigns, including Campaign 2000: A Functional Analysis of Presidential Campaign Discourse. He is currently the editor of the Journal of Communication. Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Glenn J. Hansen Glenn J. Hansen GLENN J. HANSEN is a doctoral candidate in the department of communication at the University of Missouri-Columbia. His research focuses on the social influence of mass media. Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Political Science Quarterly, Volume 118, Issue 4, Winter 2003, Pages 599–626, https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-165X.2003.tb00407.x Published: 15 February 2013

Topic of presidential campaign discourse and election outcome

Research employing Functional Theory has generated considerable data on the nature of political, and primarily presidential, campaign discourse. This study investigates the relationship of the topic of presidential campaign discourse—the proportion of utterances focusing on policy and character—and election outcome. Employing a large sample of multiple presidential message forms (television spots, debates, speeches) from presidential campaigns spanning 1948–2000, the study presents evidence that presidential candidates who discuss policy more frequently (and character less) than their opponents are more likely to win elections. It appears that many citizens primarily view the presidency as an institution that implements policy and vote accordingly. This finding, that discussion of policy issues is important to election outcome, has implications for candidates, scholars, and those who cover political campaigns.

The Bush and Gore Presidential Campaign Web Sites: Identifying with Hispanic Voters during the 2000 Iowa Caucuses and New Hampshire Primary

This study examines presidential campaign discourse addressed to Hispanic voters during the 2000 Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary. Burke's concept of identification is used to determine how candidates identified with Hispanics through (1) common association, (2) antithesis, and (3) subtlety or cunning. Results reveal that George W. Bush invested more in his Spanish Web site and differentiated more among distinct Hispanic populations to create identification with specific subgroups, while Al Gore presented a pan-Latino message. Overall, only four of the thirty-one analyzed messages focused specifically on mobilizing voters during the primary/caucus season.

Mapping Campaign Discourse

This article, which is a report of the Campaign Discourse Mapping Project, draws on the speeches, ads, and news of the 1960, 1980, 1988, 1992, and 1996 campaigns to debunk three widely held beliefs about presidential campaign discourse: that it has become more negative, that reporting on it has become more negative, and that there is little new from day to day in the stump speeches of the major party presidential condidates.

Presidential Campaign Discourse: Strategic Communication Problems. Edited by Kathleen E. Kendall. Albany: State University of New York Press. 1995. 319 p. $59.50 cloth, $19.95 paper.

Presidential Campaign Discourse: Strategic Communication Problems. Edited by Kathleen E. Kendall. Albany: State University of New York Press. 1995. 319 p. $59.50 cloth, $19.95 paper.

Civic republicanism in the modern age: Adlai Stevenson in the 1952 presidential campaign

This essay examines the 1952 presidential campaign as an instance of contemporary civic republicanism. The essay claims that Stevenson adapted the tenets of republicanism as a pragmatic response to the obstacles that confronted him in his race for the White House. Analysis of his campaign rhetoric reveals the strengths and limitations of republicanism as a political argument. The essay explores the complex relationship between rhetorical style, political judgment, and presidential campaign discourse.