“How Trump, Harris, and Clinton Shape Their Campaigns with Rhetoric: A Comparative Analysis”

Speeches by Donald Trump, Kamala Harris… and Hillary Clinton on the Campaign Trail

Shakespeare may have said that it was the purpose of acting “to hold as ‘twere the mirror up to nature”; but, perhaps unwittingly, speechmaking does a pretty good job of doing much the same. It’s fascinating to see what a speech, the tropes and rhetoric used, reveal about a person.

The recent sparring between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris has provided fine insights, via the differences in their rhetoric. (And I don’t mean the lazy, modern use of “rhetoric” to denote speech or point of view you don’t agree with politically, but the classic use of the word to denote stuff that underpins a great speech, and which often has an Ancient Greek name).

Kamala Harris and Hillary Clinton on the Road

In fact, Kamala Harris and Hillary Clinton share much in common in terms of rhetoric. If we peer through the old tripartite prism of “ethos”, “pathos” and “logos” (which I know sometimes is a scoundrel’s device), it’s clear that both Kamala Harris and Hillary Clinton rely for their “ethos” argument on their past: on their spotless record in public service over many years. This they see as proof of their presidential credentials: public service.

Clinton's ethos was rooted in her long career in public service, including her roles as First Lady, Senator, and Secretary of State. She leans heavily on her experience.

Harris draws on her experience as Attorney General and Senator, presenting herself as a fighter for justice and fairness.

Of course, Donald Trump takes a very different line. His sole ethos iss his own personality, his personal brand; this influences almost everything about his public speaking: his cranky choice of wording, his style, his persona.

His proof of worthiness is his very lack of public service …. Remember the lines about the “swamp” …. “drain the swamp”?

His palliness – like calling Zuckerberg “Zuckerbucks” - is all about persona. It brings everything down to the personal. Almost the private…. Like we know him.

The Pathos?

When it comes to the “pathos”, both Clinton and Harris advocate for progressive causes, such as women’s rights, racial justice, and economic equality.

Clinton emphasized women’s rights, especially reproductive rights, as well as the need to stand against racism and bigotry.

While Harris also emphasizes issues like reproductive rights, economic justice, and labor rights, she focuses on how her policies will help marginalized and working-class Americans.

Both are rooted in progressive ideals, appealing to voters who prioritize equality, justice, and social reform.

Donald Trump’s “pathos” comes down to fear and urgency: viz his statements about crime, illegal immigration, and threats to American values. He warns that without his leadership, America will lose its greatness and be overrun by chaos.

Pathos for Trump comes down to: "We won't have a country left" (37:01). Statement which are designed to create a sense of imminent danger.

The Logos

And finally, “logos”.

Trump’s appeals to logic are based on simple cause-and-effect. For instance, he frequently suggests that electing him will immediately fix problems like illegal immigration, crime, and economic decline.

His messaging is so damn, well, simple: "We will stop illegal immigration and have safe borders" (21:48)

Meanwhile, Harris tends to use more detailed arguments based on policy proposals and legislation. Her speeches often include references to specific plans and how they will be implemented, such as expanding healthcare, improving infrastructure, and addressing climate change.

"In Michigan today, we’re seeing the results of decades of policies that haven’t served working families. Too many people are working two or even three jobs just to put food on the table, while the cost of living keeps going up. That's why our administration is focused on rebuilding the middle class from the ground up.”

It all sounds convincing, but also ever so slightly difficult. Trump uses one sentence. Harris, three rather long ones.

And here’s Hillary: “ I believe that we should make the biggest investment in new, good-paying jobs since World War II. We need to make investments in infrastructure, clean energy, and advanced manufacturing. That’s how we will create millions of good-paying jobs. My plan will also make sure that the wealthy, Wall Street, and corporations pay their fair share of taxes, so we can invest in education, healthcare, and job training for every American."

You get the point.

Donald Trump builds his campaign on simples – and around his personality. Harris and Clinton build (or built) the campaign on the past.

Is Harris about to make the Clinton mistake?

If elections are about change and the change candidate, then the voice of change belongs to Donald Trump.

?

Or as James Brown once said, according to Van Morrison,? “If tired of what you’ve got, try me”.