This review focuses on the Democratic Presidential Debate held on the 9th of March. The paper aims to analyze and overview the language, tone, and metaphors used in the debate as well as expand on Lakoff’s idea of the ‘nation as family’ metaphor.
The part of the debate concerning the immigration policies and the candidate’s views of them is highly representative of the overall rhetorical strategies in use. Bernie Sanders, for example, continually accentuated the word “slavery” over and over again to point out the current deficiencies in the guest worker programs. Each time the word was underlined by the tone giving it more weight and impact. Remembering Lakoff’s description of the way neural pathways work, it can be discerned that by using the word with powerful negative connotations in the public mind and accentuating it, Sanders makes the listeners recall everything they know about slavery and start building associations with the issue being discussed. It is a powerful tool to instigate certain emotions through the use of existing neural networks in the brains of most Americans. It is a similar mechanism to the one fueling metaphorical thinking in people. By using these connotations, Sanders tries to underline how important it is for him to change the policies which allow for “modern-day slavery.”
The rhetorical devices used by Hilary Clinton are similar. Where Sanders sought to invoke negativity with the mention of slavery, she used positive imagery by appealing to the associative thinking of the listeners. Clinton said, “I do not want to deport children. I do not want to deport family members”. The key point accented by her tone was the word “family”. By emphasizing it, Clinton tried to bring the image of listeners’ own families to their minds. With that move, she highlights her point by making people think, how awful it would be to have their family member deported. She ensures them that she would not be the one to do such a terrible thing.
As for the metaphor of ‘nation as a family, it is used implicitly. The Democratic Party traditionally presents itself as a progressive party. As such the thinking of the politicians in the party and their supporters lean towards the ‘Nurturing Parent Model’ suggested by Lakoff. They stand for empowerment and responsibility for oneself and others. The candidates implicitly draw parallels between the USA and the family. The issues of immigrant families and immigrant children are constantly brought up. That ensures that the listeners not only draw connections between their families and the families of the immigrants but also implies the course to take responsibility for others who were not previously part of the nation. America is supposed to empower immigrants and care for them the same way a nurturing family cares for their children. Using that concept, Clinton tries to convince the listeners that Sanders does not fully follow the progressive state model, as he has supported unlimited immigrant detention in the past. While the metaphor of ‘nation as a family’ is not used directly, similar associations are drawn upon and the values named by Lakoff as typical for progressives are being promoted. It can be seen that the candidates cater to the progressive model in the minds of their supporters.
It is hard to cover all the variety of the rhetoric techniques used by the candidates during the debate in just three pages. However, the examples given here show how Lakoff’s model of ‘nation as a family’ and two major models of governance, described by the scientist, can be used to gain a deeper understanding of the rhetorics used in the presidential race. Even speeches seemingly unrelated to the concepts of the family are affected by how the candidates and their supporters perceive the role of the state. Appealing to the crowd politicians willingly or subconsciously also appeal to the view of the state that the crowd has. They use the language which would not only invoke a certain response emotionally but would also reinforce the views of the country the crowd already has. Trump gained incredible support this season by appealing to the conservative ‘Strict Father Model’ of the state. His public image is that a strict and proactive ‘father of a new nation’ –authoritarian, ready to solve problems, and use force. He offers to clean house by himself and ensure that his ‘children have a field to compete for ‘father’s favors. He also promises to exclude everybody deemed unworthy from the family by ousting the immigrants and making sure no more arrive. On the other hand, Bernie Sanders is gaining more popularity by appealing to the opposing ‘Nurturing Parent Model’. He promises empowerment and equal opportunities and aims to achieve that by limiting the current ‘strict fathers’ of America – the corporations.
Lakoff’s point of view gives deeper insight into the popularity of certain presidential candidates. While some people can label Trump a radical madman and Sanders a socialist, by changing the perspective, we can see that those candidates appeal to the different models of a state which are already existent in the mind of everybody in the world. And appealing to the concepts already deeply rooted in the human mind is one of the most powerful tools any politician has.