maket_N_verjin.qxp


Strategies and Tactics in 
Gaining Public Opinion

Nowadays the growing interest in political discourseis quite evident. Such questions as: - How is
political power won and lost? And how crucial is the role of
language in ups and downs of political life? - can be better
understood through discourse analysis. The analysis through
the strategies and tactics used in political campaigns
highlights new directions in language study regarding
political discourse as a tool of manipulation and persuasion
(Johnson-Cartee, Copeland 2004:146). 

The research is carried out based on American political
discourse. The United States managed to create a democratic
country with concepts of truth and respect regardless of a

person’s nationality or ethnic background. The correct understanding of citizenship,
solidarity, and national consciousness were implemented in Americans’ minds and souls
by professional politicians (Chilton 2004:11). 

Language is a weapon and an important tool in attracting public support. We would
like to show how the American politicians use the English language and how it
demonstrates its powerful creative abilities in gaining public support. Traditionally,
political clashes take place between the members of two main parties. But what happens
when two politicians represent one single party? 

An investigation of the transcripts of Democratic presidential debates between
Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama adds new content information to the
flourishing field of political linguistics.

The reason for selecting these debates is quite simple. The candidates, as members
of the same party, share a number of common and unique features. For example, they
have the same target audience who traditionally has adopted the democratic principles
of their party. At the same time there must be crucial differences between them – it is the
first time in the history of the United States that the candidates for the Presidency are –
an African American and a woman. 

An analysis of the transcripts of presidential debates brought us to the conclusion
that the two main strategies utilized by both speakers are the strategy of positive self-
presentation and negative other-presentation.

The polarization between Us and Them, and the different ways of expressing
negative and positive opinions are enhanced by the choice of various language units. 

The 2008 Democratic Party Presidential debates in the US are vivid examples of
this polarization. The positive self-presentation interwoven with national pride and glory
are combined with the portrayal of others which are downplayed by the candidates with
strong determination to reveal the difference and threat which they symbolize.

66

Armenian Folia Anglistika Linguistics

Armine Simonyan



Let’s give an example demonstrating the strategy of positive self-presentation by
quoting Hillary Clinton at the Democratic Party Presidential Debate in Utah.

“…I’m running because I think I’m the most qualified and experienced person to
hit the ground running in January 2009”.

Barack Obama in LA said,
“I am confident that we can solve any problem and we can fulfill the destiny that

America wants to see, not just next year, but in many years to come”. 
This strategy on Hillary Clinton’s part is realized by parallel repetition of the

pronoun “I”, which in combination with the superlative degree of adjectives (the most
qualified and the most experienced), intensifies the idea and strengthens its impact on
the listener.

It goes without saying that personal pronouns are extremely important in political
discourse. If Hillary Clinton uses the personal pronoun “I”, Barack Obama prefers the
combination of “I” and “We” focusing the attention of the audience not only on himself
but also on the audience, emphasizing the positive characteristics of the whole nation
and regarding himself and the American nation as a single entity. 

In this passage we can solve any problem and we can fulfill the destiny the first
person plural pronoun we conceptualizes group identity, distinguishing insiders from the
outsiders. The use of the modal verb can shows the speaker’s attitude towards the action
indicated by the infinitive. The author wants to point out his strong intention, his ability
to realize his future plans. 

Emphasizing positive characteristics of oneself, the politicians often appeal to the
illustration of the issue of national identity which is intended to target the broadest
number of supporters. This is the reason why both candidates of the Democratic Party
pay special attention to the symbols of national identity. This is reflected either in the
beginning or the end of their speeches. The sense of national identity is represented in
the phrases “the America people, my fellow Americans, all Americans”.

The strategy of positive self-presentation has been used by politicians to prove their
professionalism and competency as they both experience attacks, one for being a woman
and the other on the topic of racism..

During the presidential debate in Utah Hillary Clinton was asked:

“Hello, my name is John McAlpin. I’m a proud serving member of
the United States military. I’m serving overseas. This question is to
Senator Hillary Clinton. The Arab states, Muslim nations, believe its
women as being second-class citizens. If you’re president of the United
States, how do you feel that you would be taken seriously by these states
in any kind of talks, negotiations, or any other diplomatic relations?”

Hillary Clinton answered: “Thank you John, and thank you for your
service to our country. You know, when I was first lady, I was privileged
to represent our country in 82 countries. I have met with many officials in
Arabic, and Muslim countries, I have met with kings and presidents and
prime ministers and sheiks and tribal leaders. And certainly, in the last

67

Linguistics Armenian Folia Anglistika



years during my time in the Senate, I have had many high-level meetings
with presidents and prime ministers in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait,
Pakistan and many other countries. … It would be quite appropriate to
have a woman president deal with the Arab and Muslim countries on
behalf of the United States of America”.

Senator Clinton starts her answer by expressing her appreciation using the tactics
of positive politeness. In this way she demonstrates her gratitude putting stress on the
existence of common ground between them. Afterwards, to enhance credibility, she
enumerates numbers of meetings with the leaders of many countries to sound persuasive
and convincing.

Speaking about racism Senator Obama quotes the Bible, seeking to have a strong
aesthetic impact on the listeners. 

The strategy of positive self-presentation backed by famous quotations relates
politician’s speech to the sphere of objectivity. 

“… what is called for is nothing more, and nothing less, than what all the world’s
great religions demand – that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. Let
us be our brother’s keeper, Scripture tells us. Let us be our sister’s keeper. Let us find that
common stake we all have in one another, and let our politics reflect that spirit as well”.

The tactics of citation used by the politician makes his speech colorful. There is
constant interaction between the linguistic units and their desirable effect on the audience.
Inverted constructions, anaphoric repetition of the phrase let us unite the audience and
enhance its positive effect. By the repetition of the word nothing the politician shows how
little is demanded to eliminate race discrimination among the people.

Humor is recognized as another vital tactics in the process of political campaigning;
it sustains interest in debates and has relaxing effect on the audience. 

When blamed for being dishonest: seeking help from the advisers of Bill Clinton,
Barack Obama tried to stop inappropriate accusations answering in a humorous way. 

“Hillary, “I look forward to you advising me…”
If we try to interpret the use of humor in this context we may conclude that humor

has rather condensed, double meaning in this context. First Senator Obama admits that
Hillary Clinton was the most valuable adviser to President Clinton and, second, in this
campaign Barak Obama considers himself to be the likely President and would like to
see Hillary Clinton as his adviser.

Personal pronouns play a crucial role in political discourse. The distinction between
the pronoun you in the previous example “You know, when I was the first lady” and the
pronoun you in “I look forward to you advising me” according to grammarians is hardly
significant. But discourse analysis reveals that in the first case we deal with the indefinite
you. The speaker implies to address simultaneously both the audience and the young
officer, whereas in the second sentence we come across direct you, Barak Obama
directly addresses his opponent. 

Indefinite you is observed also in the following example “You should vote for me”,
in this case the speaker addresses only the audience. High frequency of indefinite you is

68

Armenian Folia Anglistika Linguistics



explained by the speaker’s appeal to the majority and his desire to regard the audience
as an indispensable entity. 

In the above-mentioned examples the strategy of positive self-presentation takes the
form of individual impression management, but when the politicians try to represent their
own party the same strategy takes the collective form of presentation. If an individual
becomes a public figure, for the sake of the party he belongs to he adopts the obligation
or commitment to avoid mentioning negative sides that could damage the positive image
of their party. Both Senator Clinton and Senator Obama are loyal to the principles of the
Democratic Party they belong to. In this respect, the positive self-representation of the
Democratic Party is manifested on the issues which are abandoned by the majority of the
population. Ideas that are intended to gain public support. are: the provision of proper
education, medical care, discrimination against minorities and women, freedom from
injustice, religious intolerance and eventually the termination of the war in Iraq.

The strategy of self-representation as the first constituent of the dichotomy is tied
up with its second half i.e. with the strategy of negative other-representation. 

There is evidence that individuals are inclined to pay more attention to negative
information. The policy of bringing out negative traits of their opponents and the
complete denial of their own is realized in assessments about others. 

The candidates may regard as “others” first of all their common enemy, the
Republican Party, and each other in these particular debates. 

Negative evaluation of their ideological rival is based on the common ground of the
concepts which are shared by the members of the Democratic Party. 

If we leave aside common enemies, we shall come to the battlefield where
candidates demonstrate strong performance and expose an extremely vast scope of
issues, sometimes they even explore personal matters.

Clinton’s sharpest attack on Obama came when she accused him of plagiarism, of
borrowing lines from a speech of his co-chairman. 

“If your campaign is going to be about words, they should be your own words.
Lifting whole passage isn’t change you can believe in, it’s change you can Xerox”.

The semantic strategy of Negative Other representation is enhanced by the
repetition of linguistic units and the use of modal verbs. In political discourse the use of
modal verbs indicates the degree of commitment to truth, to ideas the utterer holds or
represents.

The strategy of negative other representation is demonstrated in another example as
well. Hillary Clinton, criticizing Barack Obama said: “You know, Senator Obama, it is
very difficult having a straight-up debate with you, because you never take responsibility
for any vote, and that has been a pattern.”

The semantic strategy of negative other representation is demonstrated through the
tactics of description. Senator Obama is described extremely negatively. He is the person
who deviates from straight-forward questions and is irresponsible. 

The same strategy was used by Barack Obama too. He said:” Senator Clinton
has, in her campaign at least, has constantly sent our negative attacks on us, e-mail,
robo-calls (prerecorded messages), fliers, television ads, radio calls, and we haven’t

69

Linguistics Armenian Folia Anglistika



whined about it, because I understand that’s the nature of this campaign”. 
Barack Obama in this case has appealed to the tactics of argumentation. The

strategy of negative other representation is backed up by statistical evidence. The
enumeration of these facts creates a negative impression on the audience. It has a
persuasive effect and strong impact on the listener. 

In some cases the strategy of negative other-presentation is combined with the
strategy of positive self-presentation. During the Iowa Caucases Hillary Clinton said.
“Some believe you get change by demanding it. Some believe you get it by hoping for it.
I believe you get it by working hard for change. That’s what I’ve done my entire life.”

Through the tactics of contrast expressed in the passage Hillary Clinton wants to
bring out her vision of changes. The contrast is created by the verbs characterizing the
opponents (to demand, which presupposes a certain portion of aggressiveness and the
verb to hope, a verb with a positive connotation but with some traits of idleness or
joblessness. The verb to work characterizes Hillary Clinton. Used as a stylistic device,
anaphoric and epiphoric repetition of linguistic units acquire not only emotive charge
but they also aim at logical emphasis, focusing the attention of the audience on the key-
phrases of the passage. Furthermore, the repetition of similar sound combinations or
rhyming is observed in this passage too. 

And one of the strongest moments in the Clinton’s campaign was in explaining the
role of gender. “People are not attacking me because I’m a woman, they are attacking
me because I am ahead”. She characterizes her opponent’s use of the word attack of
negative connotation. Hillary Clinton doesn’t want to focus the attention on the problem
of gender as if it doesn’t exist. She is projecting to her supporters the image of a person
who is ahead in this campaign. Here again we face the combination of both semantic
strategies. The internal rhyming consolidates the ideas expressed in the sentence.

In my opinion this quotation sums up Hillary Clinton’s platform during these
debates: “It did take a Clinton to clean up after the first Bush, and I think it might take
another one to clean up after the second Bush”.

Political discourse is not just words, sentences or ideas expressed by an ordinary
citizen, it is an influential tool that might cause concrete forms of action. Focusing on
crime, violence, terrorism, and the negative properties of others politicians must be, to
some extent, exquisitely accurate, as inappropriate definitions can easily lead the
audience either to horrors of quarrels and clashes or to the disillusionment of citizens and
their loss of interest towards politics itself.

References:

1. Chilton, Paul (2004) Analysing Political Discourse: theory and practice. London &
New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.

2. Johnson-Cartee, Karen, S.; Copeland, Gary, A. (2004) Strategic Political
Communication: rethinking social influence, persuasion, and propaganda.
Maryland: Rowman &Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

70

Armenian Folia Anglistika Linguistics



ÆÝãå»ë Ýí³×»É ѳë³ñ³ÏáõÃÛ³Ý Ñ³Ù³Ïñ³ÝùÁ.
é³½Ù³í³ñ³Ï³Ý ¨ Ù³ñï³í³ñ³Ï³Ý ÑݳñÝ»ñ 

ø³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý ËáëáõÛÃÇ ËݹÇñÝ»ñÇ Ñ»ï³½áïáõÃÛáõÝÁ ųٳݳϳÏÇó
É»½í³µ³ÝáõÃÛ³Ý ³ñ¹Ç³Ï³Ý áõÕÕáõÃÛáõÝÝ»ñÇó ¿: 

ø³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý ·áñÍãÇ Ñ³Ù³ñ É»½áõÝ ½»Ýù ¿ ѳë³ñ³ÏáõÃÛ³Ý É³ÛÝ ½³Ý·-
í³ÍÝ»ñÇ Ñ³Ù³Ïñ³ÝùÁ Ýí³×»Éáõ ѳٳñ: êáõÛÝ ³ß˳ï³ÝùÇ Ýå³ï³ÏÝ ¿
µ³ó³Ñ³Ûï»É, û ÇÝãå»ë »Ý ³Ù»ñÇÏÛ³Ý ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý ·áñÍÇãÝ»ñÁ ÏÇñ³éáõÙ
³Ý·É»ñ»ÝÁ` ÅáÕáíñ¹Ç ³ç³ÏóáõÃÛáõÝÁ Ó»éù µ»ñ»Éáõ ³ÏÝϳÉÇùáí: лﳽá-
ïáõÃÛ³Ý ÝÛáõÃÁ ²ØÜ-áõÙ 2008 Ãí³Ï³ÝÇ Ý³Ë³·³Ñ³Ï³Ý ÁÝïñáõÃÛáõÝÝ»ñÇÝ
Ù³ëݳÏóáÕ Ã»ÏݳÍáõÝ»ñ ÐÇɳñÇ øÉÇÝÃáÝÇ ¨ ´³ñ³Ï úµ³Ù³ÛÇ ÙÇç¨ Í³-
í³Éí³Í µ³Ý³í»×»ñÝ »Ý: ÀÝïñáõÃÛ³Ý å³ï׳éÝ ³ÏÝѳÛï ¿: ÂíáõÙ ¿, û
ûÏݳÍáõÝ»ñÁ, áñå»ë ÙǨÝáõÛÝ Ïáõë³ÏóáõÃÛ³Ý ³Ý¹³ÙÝ»ñ, ß³ï ÁݹѳÝ-
ñáõÃÛáõÝÝ»ñ áõÝ»Ý. »ñÏáõëÝ ¿É å³ïϳÝáõÙ »Ý ÙǨÝáõÛÝ Ïáõë³ÏóáõÃÛ³ÝÁ,
ѻ勉µ³ñ ݳ¨ áõÝ»Ý ÅáÕáíñ¹³Ï³Ý ÙǨÝáõÛÝ ëϽµáõÝùÝ»ñÇÝ Ñ³í³ï³ñÇÙ
Éë³ñ³Ý: ØÇÝã¹»é Ýñ³Ýó ÙÇç¨ ½·³ÉÇ ï³ñµ»ñáõÃÛáõÝÝ»ñÝ ³Ïݵ³Ë »Ý: ²ØÜ-
Ç å³ïÙáõÃÛ³Ý Ù»ç ³é³çÇÝ ³Ý·³Ù ݳ˳·³ÑÇ ³ÃáéÝ ³ÏÝϳÉáõÙ »Ý ½µ³-
Õ»óÝ»É ÙÇ ¹»åùáõÙ ÏÇÝ, ÙÛáõë ¹»åùáõ٠먳Ùáñà ûÏݳÍáõ: лﳽáïáõÃÛ³Ý
»Ý »ÝóñÏí»É »ñÏáõ ûÏݳÍáõÝ»ñÇ ÏáÕÙÇó ÏÇñ³éíáÕ é³½Ù³í³ñáõÃÛáõÝÁ ¨
Ù³ñï³í³ñáõÃÛáõÝÁ:

71

Linguistics Armenian Folia Anglistika