"Emotion must not be discarded by 
logicians as inherently fallacious; 

however, it must also be used 
cautiously by rhetoricians in order to 

secure influence over an audience 
without infringing upon the veracity 

of one's assertions." 



I N T R O D U C I N G E M O T I O N : 

The Use of Emotion and Character in Presidential Speeches 

T I M H E N D E R S O N 

T H I S P A P E R E X P L O R E S T H E RE L A T I O N S H I P B E T W E E N T R U T H A N D E M O T I O N I N R H E T O -

R I C W I T H S P E C I A L F O C U S O N T H E O P E N I N G M O M E N T S O F T H R E E S P E E C H E S B Y 

A M E R I C A N P R E S I D E N T S , T H E F I R S T C R U C I A L M O M E N T S O F A S P E E C H A R E P R I M E O P -

P O R T U N I T I E S T O A P P E A L T O T H E E M O T I O N S O F T H E A U D I E N C E , A P R A C T I C E W H I C H I S 

A R G U A B L Y O F D U B I O U S V E R A C I T Y . T O C O U N T E R T H I S S U P P O S E D F A L L A C Y , T H I S P A P E R 

E X P L O R E S T H R E E S P E E C H E S W H E R E E M O T I O N I S U S E D T R U T H F U L L Y A N D E F F E C T I V E L Y . 

G I V E N T H E S E R E S U L T S , T H E U S E O F E M O T I O N I N P R E S I D E N T I A L R H E T O R I C I S S E E N T O 

B E N O T O N L Y P E R M I S S I B L E , B U T N E C E S S A R Y T O I N F L U E N C I N G O N E ' S A U D I E N C E . 



I N T R O D U C T I O N 

During the crucial opening moments of speeches to the 

American people, American Presidents often use emotion 

i n an attempt to influence their audience's views. Without 

a convincing and intriguing introduction, rhetoricians are 

likely to fail in their later attempts to persuade their audi-

ence. But the appeal to emotion is often considered a logi-

cal fallacy because of the supposed inconsistency of emo-

tion in judgments of truth. I n order to judge the 

relationship of these emotional introductions to truth, 

three introductions to presidential speeches are defined ac-

cording to three emotion-based argumentative tactics iden-

tified by Douglas Walton in The Place of Emotion in 

Argument. The tactics are the argumentum ad populum, ar-

gumentum ad baculum, and argumentum ad hominem. 

Speeches by Presidents Lyndon B. Johnson, John F. 

Kennedy, and George W. Bush serve as examples of these 

arguments in political rhetoric. Each speech enhances its 

appeal to emotion through the use of allusion to character, 

a tactic treated by Alan Brinton in his article, "Character i n 

ithotic Argument." Brinton's three examples relate to 

Seneca's works, but they also shed light on these cases, i f i n 

slightly different forms. A n examination of these three in-

troductions demonstrates that the opening moments of the 

presidents' speeches are based on logical, yet emotionally-

charged, arguments. Although usually suspect in the field 

of rhetoric, both Walton and Brinton support the claim that 

emotion can be used effectively and truthfully in political 

discourse. 

The speeches below offer views of the president playing the 

roles of unifier, commander-in-chief, and politician. 

Although the admiration and trust held by the American 

people for their president has without doubt declined i n the 

past decades, there is still an expectation that political lead-

ers wi l l speak truthfully to their audiences. This paper con-

siders only the beginning of each of these speeches to con-

sider the way in which an appeal to emotion at the begin-

ning of a speech is meant to immediately impact the 

audience and prime them for greater persuasion. This 

paper wi l l focus especially on the importance of the intro-

duction in American political rhetoric and the unique rela-

tionship between the president and his fellow citizens. 

Walton describes the argumentum ad populum as an "ap-

peal to popular sentiment or opinion" in argumentation. 1 

This appeal presupposes that the audience of the speech 

has some widely held beliefs which the speaker can safely 

assume hold universal appeal. But Walton identifies a 

number of reasons why many logicians immediately dis-

credit the argumentum ad populum as fallacious. Most sig-

nificantly, they maintain that the appeal to emotion auto-

matically makes the argument invalid and assumes a 

universal audience where one does not exist. 1 1 Walton 

states that neither of these reasons is sufficient to discount 

the truth of some arguments based on popular appeals. 

Most basic to Walton's argument against the discrediting of 

the ad populum is the mistaken presumption that "appeals 

to popular emotions are in a separate category from logical 

reasoning." 1" Rather, as wi l l be seen i n the beginning of 

Lyndon Johnson's speech "We Shall Overcome," the appeal 

to popular sentiment can draw truthful conclusions. 

L Y N D O N B. J O H N S O N 

Speaking during the tumultuous Civil Rights Era, 

President Lyndon Johnson appeals to the universal themes 

of "the dignity of man" and the "destiny of democracy" in 

his argument for greater equality for African Americans. 

Although these themes are expressed i n phrases with posi-

tive connotations, President Johnson's opening remarks 

.. the opening moments of the presidents' speeches are 
based on logical, yet emotionally-charged y arguments." 

E L E M E N T S S P R I N G 06 



are meant to suggest a lack of equality. That is, by suggest-

ing "dignity" and "democracy" he is really referring to the 

injustice and inequality in America, triggering in his audi-

ence an emotional response of shame and regret. While it 

could be argued that the appeal to emotion i n this argu-

ment makes it immediately erroneous, the issues of race 

and discrimination are more adequately discussed by a 

"mutual interaction of thinking and feeling in ethical deci-

sion making. " 1 V Indeed it 

would be nearly impossi-

ble to discuss the racial in-

equalities i n America at 

this time without infusing 

some elements of emotion 

into one's argument. 

Topics such as human dig-

nity do not lend them-

selves to discussions based 

solely on facts and data. As 

President Johnson im-

plores his people to look to 

Selma, Alabama as an ex-

ample of the undeniable 

prejudice i n America, the 

truth of his argument is 

not threatened by its use of 

emotions. The topic of 

Johnson's speech sug-

gests, however, that the 

larger audience is not a 

universally coherent 

group. The divisions 

within America at this 

time need to be discussed 

i n relation to the second 

criticism of ad populum arguments, that they make a uni-

fied audience out of a limited group. 

President Johnson states that i n order for racial inequality 

to be erased in America, "members of both parties, 

Americans of all religions, and of all colors, from every sec-

tion of this country, [must support] that cause." The 

American populace is a large and varied group, with differ-

ent viewpoints and values, which could call into question 

the use of the ad populum, challenging the existence of a 

unified opinion to which to appeal. But Walton states that 

it is more important that "the audience to whom the argu-

ment is directed accepts these premises enthusiastically" 

than that the premises are universally valid. v It is certainly 

easier to speak to people 

who already agree with the 

speaker's position. In this 

case, however, it can be as-

sumed that at least the ma-

jority of the population 

agreed in principle with the 

goals of achieving "dignity" 

and "democracy." This 

practical approach offers 

the speaker more flexibility 

in his approach while still 

being able to maintain a 

level of relative truth. 

Although this is not a per-

fect and undeniable truth, 

relative truth can be accept-

able in complicated cases. 

The people who President 

Johnson most needs to con-

vince are those who hold 

racial prejudices. These 

same people would contest 

the notions of dignity and 

democracy being inclusive 

of African Americans and 

thus call into doubt the ve-

racity of the argument. Walton again offers important in-

sight in stating that one must be a "rational respondent" i n 

the audience to qualify as an important judge of an argu-

ment. v l The argument could be made here that those who 

believe that African Americans are not worthy of equal 

treatment are themselves not rational. This may be using 

I N T R O D U C I N G E M O T I O N ! T H E USE OF E M O T I O N A N D CHA RA CTER I N P R E S I D E N T I A L SPEECHES 



historical hindsight, but it must be considered that in this 

case the possibility of having a universal audience in 

America is not plausible. While it is important for the pres-

ident to convince those who do not agree with h im, it is 

more practical to try and convince those who do not hold 

radical views. Indeed the message of the speech is to rally 

support behind the president's racially unifying policies i n 

the hope that an American consensus may be forged. So 

while the president's ad populum argument is based on 

some important presumptions, these assumptions are 

both reasonable and necessary to the continuation of the 

discussion. 

Having established the necessity of emotion in President 

Johnson's introduction, it is possible to examine how the 

president expands upon his original appeal to emotion 

through the first of Brinton's appeal to character. Following 

his universal appeal to extinguish the flames of inequality 

i n America, President Johnson refers to the "unending 

search for freedom" which has roots i n places like 

Lexington, Concord, and Appomattox. Much like the 

events in Selma, Alabama which spurred the president's re-

marks, the Battle of Appomattox is one symbol of the strug-

gle to secure the freedom of African Americans. Many 

years after the end of the Civil War, African Americans dur-

ing the 1960s were still unequal citizens. One of the three 

appeals to authority comes in the form of what Brinton calls 

"the exemplar. " v u Described as a "reference to actual his-

torical examples," the audience is encouraged to remember 

the importance of this event, and the people who died to es-

tablish a precedent of racial equality. v l l i President 

Johnson's earlier exhortation to realize the "destiny of 

democracy" is supported by the sacrifice and principles that 

led the soldiers of the North to fight against the injustice of 

slavery in the South. By using this exemplar, President 

Johnson's abstract appeal to emotion is given a more tangi-

ble representation by referencing America's history. As 

Brinton suggests, the exemplar suggests the virtuous ac-

tions which should be emulated by the audience. iX In this 

sense, the exemplar provides factual evidence to support 

what was previously an almost entirely emotional appeal. 

Although most in the audience had no personal involve-

ment in the Civil War, they all knew what occurred and 

what was at stake. By drawing the connection between the 

1860s and the 1960s the president hopes that the shame of 

America's continuing inequalities wi l l be intensified. 

Rhetorically speaking, the argument is based less on strict 

emotional appeal, being supported by this reference to the 

past. 

J O H N F. K E N N E D Y 

The argumentum ad baculum is defined by Walton as an 

"appeal to threat of force or to fear ... in a critical discus-

sion.'^ Walton spends considerable time discussing this 

definition and whether or not an ad baculum argument 

must include a threat or i f fear alone can define the ad bac-

ulum.™ Walton also states that the "context of the dialogue" 

determines whether the ad baculum wi l l be deemed valid or 

fallacious. x n For the purposes of this discussion, the situa-

tional definition proves more enlightening to the discus-

sion of the truthfulness of his claims. It would be inappro-

priate for a direct threat to be made in a speech. It would be 

more appropriate to carefully use threat or fear i n an argu-

ment in what Walton describes as a "negotiation dia-

logue." X U 1 I n the case of a negotiation, there is a greater ex-

pectation on the part of both parties that threats may be 

used should resolution of a conflict reach an impasse. The 

following speech by President John F. Kennedy is an inter-

esting variation on the typical negotiation dialogue between 

a speaker and an opponent. Rather than a threat of force 

against his or her opponent, the third party of Communist 

Russia serves as the threat to both speaker and audience. 

Nevertheless, this is an ad baculum argument because of 

the fear the president's argument is meant to arouse in his 

audience. A n examination of President Kennedy's "The 

Berlin Crisis" wi l l then serve as an example of the use of the 

emotions aroused by fear in an argument. 

Domestically and internationally, the perceived threat of 

communism had created a climate of fear in post-World 

War I I America. Fears were realized when, in 19 61, Soviet 

Russia contested America's claim to parts of the city of 

E L E M E N T S S P R I N G 06 



Berlin, which had been divided at the end of World War I I . 

In this time of crisis President Kennedy spoke to the 

American people about the threat facing them and the need 

to meet this crisis with fortitude. To begin his speech, 

President Kennedy referenced the "grim warnings about 

the future of the world" offered by Russian Premier 

Khrushchev weeks earlier. Although the American people 

would not be directly 

harmed by this action, 

there is an implied threat 

that i f the Soviets forced 

the Americans out of 

Berlin, they could emerge 

anywhere. In this case the 

threat could do harm to 

both members of the dia-

logue; both parties in this 

speech could be harmed by 

the same source. It is ap-

parent that the emotions 

aroused in both parties as a 

result of this speech are 

fear and uncertainty. But 

does this use of emotion 

constitute a logical fallacy? 

This question may be bet-

ter answered by examining 

the larger purpose of the 

speech. 

Later in his speech, 

President Kennedy asks 

Congress for more money 

and support for the Armed Forces to help the people of 

Berlin. But the president also states that the American peo-

ple must be aware of "new threats in Berlin or elsewhere" 

because "[Americans] cannot afford not to meet this chal-

lenge." President Kennedy's aims in this speech are more 

wide-reaching than simply freeing the oppressed people of 

Berlin. As a means for asking for more money and sup-

plies to fight this threat, the president evidences his appeal 

to fear with an event occurring at the moment. Although 

the president hopes to use this incident as a means for 

building up the military, there was at least some semblance 

of a threat to American interests to warrant this reaction. 

So while historians have and wi l l argue about the actual 

threat of communism, in this case it can be said that the ar-

gument ad baculum was based upon evidence. The appeal 

to fear i n this case was a 

truthful representation of 

the situation facing the 

United States at the time. 

His argument appeals to 

the emotions of the 

American people, and 

President Kennedy uses 

techniques to rhetorically 

exploit these emotions. 

President Kennedy com-

pletes his ad baculum argu-

ment by becoming the 

savior of the American 

people, the suppressor of 

their fears. By speaking 

"frankly" and "openly" 

about the situation, the sit-

uation does not seem so 

grave. To conclude his 

introduction, President 

Kennedy uses an allusion 

to the past to shore up his 

ad baculum argument and 

appeal to fear. Exploiting 

the division between security and anxiety, the president ref-

erences the victory of the Allied powers over Nazi Germany 

which led to the partitioning of Berlin. Here we find an-

other example of an appeal to character and authority as de-

fined by Brinton. This reference to Nazi Germany may be 

defined as a mix of an "exemplar" and a "spectator."x l v The 

spectator is defined by Brinton as an example which forces 

the members of the audience to ask themselves: what 

I N T R O D U C I N G E M O T I O N : T H E USE OF E M O T I O N A N D CHA RA CTER I N P R E S I D E N T I A L SPEECHES 



would this person do in this situation or what would I do i f 

this person were watching? In this context the exemplar re-

minds the audience of the courage and sacrifice required to 

win that war and the spectator asks them what those who 

sacrificed for that war would do i n this situation. Many in 

the audience had fresh memories of either fighting in the 

war or living during war time and would have easily drawn 

the parallels between this new dilemma and W W I I . This is 

another reversal in language in President Kennedy's intro-

duction. After the strength conveyed in the second para-

graph, the president again resumes his somber-toned allu-

sion to a time of victory achieved through great hardship. 

By constantly shifting the emotions he is appealing to, 

President Kennedy further exploits the alarm created in the 

first lines of his speech and garners more leverage to con-

vince his audience of his proposals later i n the speech. This 

allusion to W W I I is the final piece of the ad baculum be-

cause it references a threat that had already been faced and 

defeated. But this allusion also implies that without simi-

lar sacrifices the new enemy, unlike the old one, may be vic-

torious. 

It is apparent that the ad baculum argument must be care-

fully used. Clearly the United States was facing a threat and 

the president wished to inform his people. But the repeated 

appeal to fear is cause for reasonable suspicion of the truth-

fulness of his argument. As Walton suggests, the ad bacu-

lum argument may be used as "scaremongering." x v It is 

difficult to believe that many Americans at the time viewed 

the President's remarks as such given the larger situation. 

Instead, it should be remarked that the president met this 

situation with appropriate concern and persuasive rhetori-

cal techniques. The leaders of the Soviet Union were listen-

ing to the president's speech and were themselves targets 

of the president's attack. In this sense, the speech could 

function on two levels according to Walton's division of the 

ad baculum.XY1 On the level already discussed, the presi-

dent's use of fear was indirectly targeted towards the 

American populace in order to stir an awareness of the sit-

uation and support Kennedy's cause, what Walton de-

scribes as a "non-threat. , , X V 1 1 On the other hand, i f viewed 

as being directed towards the Soviet Union, this speech 

could be viewed as an indirect threat, because it is not 

specifically addressed to the Soviet U n i o n . x v i i i While the 

president knew the Soviet leaders would be listening, it was 

the support of his constituency, the American nation, that 

was most important to h im. They serve as the primary au-

dience of his ad baculum argument. 

GEORGE W . B U S H 

In the final emotion-based argument, the argumentum ad 

hominem, President George W. Bush contends that his op-

ponent i n the 2 0 0 4 Presidential Election, Senator John 

Kerry, has dubious credibility for the position of president 

because of his inability to establish consistent policy posi-

tions. According to the subdivision of the ad hominem ar-

guments by Walton, this argument by President Bush 

should be classified as a circumstantial ad hominem or the 

"questioning of an arguer's position by citing a presump-

tive inconsistency within that posit ion." x , x In fact, President 

Bush's attack is a textbook case of this type of argument, 

one that many raised against Senator Kerry during the elec-

tion. At the beginning of his opening statement, President 

Bush (referring to Kerry) states he "can see why people 

think he changes positions a lot, because he does." The 

president uses as evidence in his introduction Senator 

Kerry's record with regard to the War in Iraq: he supported 

the war before it occurred, but condemned it when popular 

sentiment changed and his opponent Howard Dean spoke 

out against it. President Bush is implying, and later explic-

itly states, that because of such uncertainty, Senator Kerry's 

ability to lead the country in a time of war is dubious. 

President Bush does not concentrate on his own policies di-

rectly, but does this indirectly by pointing to the matters 

which Senator Kerry has changed positions on and he has 

continued to support. The strength of this argument relies 

on the audience's belief that what the president has done 

has been beneficial, but most important is that Bush de-

fends the consistency of his own actions. In his introduc-

tion, President Bush sets himself up against Senator Kerry 

as a man of deep-seated beliefs, worthy of a second term as 

president. Undecided voters are left wondering about the 

ELEM ENTS S P R I N G 06 



character of Senator Kerry in opposition to the president 

who has not wavered from his position despite controversy. 

By placing this attack at the beginning of the debate the 

president is able to point out this character flaw throughout 

the debate. The ad hominem in the introduction of the de-

bate can serve as the theme of the debate, to which the pres-

ident may continually return. Although the argument is 

backed up with examples by 

President Bush, it is prima-

rily an appeal to the ab-

stract, emotional character-

istics Senator Kerry 

exemplifies. 

President Bush's reference 

to Senator Kerry's record to 

call into doubt his character 

is another use of one of 

Brinton's appeals to author-

ity. In this case, the presi-

dent is appealing to a very 

straightforward "citation" 

of his opponent's voting 

record. x x The citation is de-

scribed by Brinton "as a 

form of ithotic argument 

[which] involves the direct 

or indirect quotation of a 

source with the intention 

that identification of the 

opinion or attitude ex-

pressed with the source wi l l 

influence hearers or read-

ers toward acceptance."3041 

It is clear from the discussion above that President Bush's 

quotation is an indirect one which references changes in 

Senator Kerry's beliefs on a number of issues. This exam-

ple relies on the premise that the American populace is sus-

picious of politicians who do not keep their word and are 

unsure of what they support. Through this example, the 

president hopes to show that the senator is unfit to be pres-

ident. In making this argument the president insists that 

he represents the opposite of the values which he claims 

Senator Kerry has exhibited in his "wishy-washy" voting 

record. As a means of rhetorical strategy, this argument 

both condemns one's opponent and extols the virtue of the 

speaker. This is a dual nature which has not been seen i n 

any of the previous arguments and is an important device 

for speakers to use. 

Although the ad hominem 

has a reputation for being 

fallacious, and nothing 

more than an attack on 

one's character, i t should be 

considered relevant and im-

portant criticism in a critical 

discussion. According to 

Walton, this importance is 

primarily derived from the 

personalization which oc-

curs when an ad hominem is 

used because it concentrates 

its attack on the character of 

one's opponent.™ 1 But 

rather than considering this 

personalization as a nega-

tive aspect of discussion, 

Walton goes so far as to say 

that this is "the most impor-

tant single benefit of a 

successful critical discus-

s ion. " x x l i i While it is clear 

that raising character issues 

is important to debate, it is 

also important to recognize that there is the possibility that 

such arguments can be used excessively and insultingly. In 

such cases, the ad hominem loses its effectiveness with the 

audience, which is also able to recognize the subtlety and 

importance of the argument when used well. The overuse 

or abuse of the ad hominem can be more injurious to the 

speaker than the intended target of criticism. When used 

I N T R O D U C I N G E M O T I O N : T H E USE OF E M O T I O N A N D CHA RA CTER I N P R E S I D E N T I A L SPEECHES 



in President Bush's opening remarks during the debate, 

however, the ad hominem immediately imprints a negative 

image of Senator Kerry's character upon the audience. 

Whether or not he directly addresses this again is not as im-

portant as the fact that it remains i n the back of the audi-

ence's mind throughout the rest of the debate. This is then 

an exceedingly effective method to use during a debate be-

cause it figures greatly into the later discussions without 

having to be mentioned. 

C O N C L U S I O N 

From this discussion it is apparent that the opening lines of 

presidential speeches are often filled with rhetorical strate-

gies that are primarily based on emotions. This discussion 

has focused on three introductions, three arguments based 

on emotion, and three appeals to character. In light of each 

of these sources the richness and complexity of introduc-

tions to rhetoric is undeniable. Without a convincing and 

appealing introduction, a speaker's ability to influence an 

audience later in the speech is greatly inhibited. The im-

portance of emotion, as discussed through Walton's pres-

entation of the emotion-based arguments, has shown that, 

practically speaking, emotions are sometimes the most ac-

curate judges of truth available. Similarly, Brinton's article 

offers three appeals to character which have been shown to 

enhance arguments based on emotion. The argumentum 

ad populum, argumentum ad baculum, and argumentum ad 

hominem must be used with appropriate decorum to the sit-

uation to be persuasive. Should these arguments extend 

beyond the boundaries of decency in a civilized forum, 

such as the president's podium, the audience may be un-

convinced and the fallacious argument wi l l harm the 

speaker instead of his opponent. Emotion must not be dis-

carded by logicians as inherently fallacious; however, it 

must also be used cautiously by rhetoricians in order to se-

cure influence over an audience without infringing upon 

the veracity of one's assertions. 

E N D N O T E S 

i . Walton, (65) 

i i . Walton, (66) 

i i i . Walton, (67) 

iv. Walton, (67) 

v. Walton, (70) 

v i . Walton, (69) 

v i i . Brinton, (252) 

v i i i . Brinton, (252) 

ix. Brinton, (253) 

x. Walton, (145) 

xi . Walton, (152) 

x i i . Walton, (144) 

x i i i . Walton, (144) 

xiv. Brinton, (252-254) 

xv. Walton, (174) 

xvi. Walton, (180) 

xvii . Walton, (180) 

xvii i . Walton, (181) 

xix. Walton, (202) 

xx. Brinton, (251) 

xxi. Brinton, (251) 

xxii . Walton, (192) 

xxii i . Walton, (192) 

REFERENCES 

Brinton, Alan. 1986. "Character i n ithotic Argument." History 

of Philosophy Quarterly, 3, pp. 245-258. 

Bush, George W. 2004. "Second Presidential Debate of 2004 

Election." Retrieved f rom 

http: //www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/08/ 

politics/main648302 .shtml. 

Johnson, Lyndon. 1965. "We Shall Overcome." Speech. 

Retrieved f rom http://www.tamu.edu/ 

comm / pres / speeches/lbjovercome.html. 

Kennedy, John F. 1961. "The Berlin Crisis." Speech. Retrieved 

f rom http://www.tamu.edu/ comm/pres/speeches/ 

j fkberl in.html. 

Walton, Douglas. 1992. The Place of Emotion i n Argument. 

University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press. 

E L E M E N T S S P R I N G 06 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/08/
http://www.tamu.edu/
http://www.tamu.edu/