The rhetoric of politics, or the strategies candidates and political figures use to persuade constituents, distracts from real issues and contributes to the polarization of American politics.
The rhetorical strategies politicians and candidates employ shape the opinions of voters and distract from hard hitting issues. The way candidates dress, speak, and act all have an effect on the way they are perceived by the public. The rhetoric surrounding the politician and their actions and words are used to purposefully distract constituents from the issues at hand, turning politics into a game of empty words and promises.
Politicians appeal to logos in several ways, most notable by making generalizations about a promising future or their future actions, and forming fallacious statements and arguments (especially relating to opponents during elections). These appeals often require constituents to accept and agree upon an assumption. For example, a politician could say that America is not doing as well as it could be, therefore needs a new direction and their plan will help us head in that direction. First, the speaker generalizes that America is not "doing as well as it could be", glossing over which specific areas need to be improved upon. This leaves room for the constituent to decide which areas America needs to improve upon, without actually taking a position. Second, the constituents must accept that America really is not doing well and needs a new direction.
Pathos is relied heavily upon by politicians to persuade constituents, as pathos is a strong motivating force behind many of our actions. Emotions drive much of our rational thought, and therefore affect our political judgements. Because of this, politicians will appeal to pathos by sharing a personal experience or emotional story in an attempt to persuade constituents. For example, a politician lobbying for tighter gun restrictions could open with the Sandy Hook school shooting, to connect their objective with an emotional tragedy. On the other end of the political spectrum, a politician lobbying for gun rights could share a story of a family protecting itself from a violent intruder through the use of a gun. Both of these instances appeal to pathos in that they make the connection between their goals and an emotional event.
Appeals to ethos employed by politicians in an effort to give themselves an air of authority. Politicians will refer to their political record (and that of their opponent during an election), and work to make themselves seem as trustworthy as possible. For example, a politician might say during a debate that they believe the defense budget should not be cut, and as their record as a Senator shows, they did not vote in favor of a cut in defense spending. They could then say that their opponent voted X number of times in favor of cutting the defense budget. This would appeal to a certain portion of the audience, establishing the fact that that particular candidate does not wish to cut defense spending, simultaneously establishing ethos.
Pathos is relied heavily upon by politicians to persuade constituents, as pathos is a strong motivating force behind many of our actions. Emotions drive much of our rational thought, and therefore affect our political judgements. Because of this, politicians will appeal to pathos by sharing a personal experience or emotional story in an attempt to persuade constituents. For example, a politician lobbying for tighter gun restrictions could open with the Sandy Hook school shooting, to connect their objective with an emotional tragedy. On the other end of the political spectrum, a politician lobbying for gun rights could share a story of a family protecting itself from a violent intruder through the use of a gun. Both of these instances appeal to pathos in that they make the connection between their goals and an emotional event.
Appeals to ethos employed by politicians in an effort to give themselves an air of authority. Politicians will refer to their political record (and that of their opponent during an election), and work to make themselves seem as trustworthy as possible. For example, a politician might say during a debate that they believe the defense budget should not be cut, and as their record as a Senator shows, they did not vote in favor of a cut in defense spending. They could then say that their opponent voted X number of times in favor of cutting the defense budget. This would appeal to a certain portion of the audience, establishing the fact that that particular candidate does not wish to cut defense spending, simultaneously establishing ethos.
The American people want to pay attention to serious ideas again. Our founding was built by people who were political philosophers, and we need to get back to that, away from this kind of cheap political rhetoric of Right and Left.
-Dave Brat
Cartoon, Rhetorical Civility, by Pat Bagley, from the Salt Lake Tribune, illustrates partisan tensions over political rhetoric. Both liberals and conservatives in America are guilty of manipulating the voter with political rhetoric.
"Rhetoric is a poor substitute for action, and we have trusted only to rhetoric. If we are really to be a great nation, we must not merely talk; we must act big."
- Theodore Roosevelt
Politicians from all over the political spectrum use similar rhetorical phrases to persuade constituents, like "a better America", "strengthening the middle class", "working toward lower taxes", and hundreds more. The reality is, all of this rhetoric ultimately contributes to the polarization of politics and a lack of action once a politician is elected. Working toward "a better America", is an empty promise, ultimately unfulfillable. Americans harboring differing ideologies are going to have different ideas about what a "better America" looks like, and how it should be achieved. Because of all of these different opinions, the politician cannot please every constituent, which is what they were trying to do in order to get elected.