Donald Trump Persuasive Analysis

1097 Words3 Pages

Before the debate began, I knew what to expect for the most part from both candidates, Donald Trump would bring his intensity and Hillary Clinton would show her political knowledge. I was very much on the side of Clinton before, during, and after the debate. Therefore, I will be slightly biased towards Donald Trump. Nevertheless, it is crucial for politicians to use persuasive techniques to enhance their speech to a wide audience, in this case the American people. Trump and Clinton differ tremendously in terms of what they believe is right for the United States. However, both candidates used persuasive techniques in the debate to try to influence the public of their legitimacy to be President of the United States. In the debate Donald Trump …show more content…

His language in the debate, like most of the time, was very simple and to the point. When speaking, he went for an “intense” (Media Literacy 342) tone of voice and word choice. He consistently used negative words such as: losing, stealing, and leaving to instill fear to the public. These simple words effectively got his message of negativity across to the public effectively. In using this intense technique, Trump presumably wanted the public to believe that he was extremely serious. For example, when he addressed terrorism, he claimed he will “...knock the hell out of ISIS” (First Presidential Debate). Trump’s simple and non “politically correct” language persuades some voters because they can relate to him. He succeeded on his part of sounding intense and aggressive. However, in my opinion his language in the debate was unprepared and somewhat uneducated compared to Clinton’s. In wanting to become president, Trump’s simple words and sentences should have been more complex. His words did not impress me and did not persuade me into believing in what he was …show more content…

For example, she used “diversion” (Media Literacy 345) after Trump questioned her experience. She countered by jabbing him about his sexist remarks about women, “...this is a man that has called women pigs, slobs, and dogs” (First Presidential Debate). This changed the subject matter previously about her credibility into a discussion about the issue of Trump’s remarks about women. This proved successful because Trump had to defend his remarks and the discussion about Clinton’s credibility ended. This was a strong technique she used because she did not have to defend herself and instead put Trump on the spot about his comments. The subject matter she spoke about helped make this technique effective because it was the first time she brought up his shaky past with

Open Document