Political Q&A

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Political Q&A

Post  tranaechatman on Mon Feb 23, 2015 1:54 pm

The Presidential debate between President Obama and the House Republicans features many different angles on dealing with evidence. In particular, a Representative from West Virginia used pathos to appeal to the emotions of the President. In a grieving tone, she stated that her state was worried that the laws that had been passed by the Obama administration would further deepen the struggle of unemployment. In responding, Obama further sympathizes with the representative, but then (in a calm, soothing tone) explains to her that he understands where she is coming from but has a bigger vision in mind for long term goals. In contrast, another representative took a more demanding, patronizing tone, listing all of the things that Obama has done wrong and mentioning how disappointed he was in him. The representative uses logos and pathos to not only get the listener infuriated but to also appeal to the logic of doing something you say you'll do. To respond to this, Obama cut off the representative in the midst of his long list and in a similar tone, debunks everything that the representative had to say.
In all, the evidence presented is only the beginning, it is more important how you phrase it to your target audience that will determine the response you get.

tranaechatman
Initiate
Initiate

Posts : 7
Join date : 2015-01-25

View user profile

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum