Arizona State University The Persuasion Strategies & Hominem Fallacy Discussion

What was the purpose of your essay? Explain how your essay is a comparative analysis. What conventions does it meet? How was this essay different than essays you’ve written previously? Describe your writing process. In writing this essay, what came easy for you? With what did you struggle?

FROM THE ESSAY BELOW !!

Introduction

Every day, people are confronted by persuasion in different forms that it is often hard to notice how outside sources influence lives. Businesspersons and politicians mainly use the persuasive component to buy their products or command a following. So, how are audiences persuaded into different loyalties? What principles govern a text enough to influence viewers? The paper will evaluate various strategies by comparing two immigration adverts made by President Trump’s administration.

Analysis of Text A

On 16 June 2015, Donald Trump officially launched his presidential campaign after winning most of the Republican National Convention nominations segments. Throughout the rallies, his main goal was a strong stance against immigration, which he enforced by endorsing various advertisements. One of broadcasts titled “Two Americas: Immigration” was first election ad that aired on various television outlets (The Washington Post n.d.). The presidential candidate accuses his counterpart and rival, Hillary Clinton, of rigging the system against the citizens. The ad also narrates how she would allow Syrian refugees to flood in, let convicted illegal immigrants stay in the country, and collect social security compensations. Conversely, the ad promises that Donald Trump America would be secure, terrorists will be kept out, and American families will be safe. Thus, according to the commercial, siding with Trump would be supporting positive change on Americans safety. “Donald Trump for president,” the advertisement concludes.

The principle of organization that governs this text takes a five-step speech format, which Alan Monroe coined in 1935 (Parviz 44). First, it gets the audience’s attention by indicating how the form of Hillary Clinton’s America. Secondly, it identifies the need, which is the safety threat and usage of illegal immigrants’ resources. Thirdly, the speaker proposes how they can be solved through Trump’s governance. Fourthly, it shows how the future will be if people accept the republican candidate. Finally, the speaker asks the nation to take action by electing Trump. The other feature included in the message is the use of Kairos. It is a mode of persuasion that takes advantage of a situation. The immigration issue has been a thorn in the US, so the campaign focused on promising an immediate solution to the crisis once Trump was elected to office. Also, the comparing and contrasting rhetorical strategy is used to try to sway the audience. The advertisement gives a stark dissimilarity between the two administrations and completely discredits Hillary’s governance.

Analysis of Text B

In 2018, during the midterm elections, Trump’s presidency made another advertisement emphasizing its stance on immigration. The ad titled “Complicit” on Donald Trump’s YouTube channel features Luis Bracamontes, an illegal immigrant (Trump n.d.). At the time of the ad, he was convicted of killing two law enforcers. The convict says that if he is let out of jail, he will kill more people, and it is a shame that he only managed to kill only two of them. The main message is to stop illegal immigration by building a wall. Also, the presenter states that everyone who stands in the way of this noble course, including the Democrats, is complicit in the murders caused by unlawful immigrants. President Trump, as the campaign promises, will keep the borders safe, consequently protect American families.

The advertisement uses cause and effect as one of its main rhetorical strategies. It is a persuasive device that shows a relationship between two things or events, where one affects the other. Luis Bracamontes, the convict, is the main conduit used to deliver the message. Trump’s presidency tries to show the consequences of opening borders and letting convicted illegal immigrants stay in the country. Bracamontes states that if he is jailed, he will get out and kill more people. Therefore, the best option is deporting him and closing the border by building a wall to disallow reentrance. Secondly, the text uses ethos to try to sway the minds of Americans. It is an appeal to character, where using a celebrity, a figure of authority, or an expert incredibly persuades people to support a course or do certain things (Madsen 32). The advertisement uses a criminal to show the country’s dire state if immigrants are allowed to stay. Bracamontes promises to cause more chaos. Based on this character, people may be inclined to believe and support Trump. Finally, the advertisement uses a problem-cause-solution organization to convey a stance on immigration. The format identifies the problem, its causes, and the solutions that would correct it. The advert makes it clear that immigrants are a problem. The presenter then identifies Democrats as the main facilitators of the problem since they stand in the way of enforcing a stricter immigration policy. Finally, the chaos caused by illegal immigrants such as Bracamontes will be eliminated by building a wall to fix the borders.

Discussion of Both Texts

Did the two campaign advertisements adequately persuade the American people? An analysis of the two texts would answer the question. In the first ad, Trump’s presidential team uses the ad hominem fallacy to convince the nation against supporting Hillary. It is a strategy where a person does not refute an argument but directly attacks the opponent. The ad asks Americans to choose between Hillary’s nation full of immigrant chaos or the peaceful US with Trump as the president. Instead of increasing the support, the advertisement attracted controversies and created divisions among the citizens. The appeal did not work because Trump made it to office through the electoral college instead of a majority vote. In contrast, the 2018 advert uses the red herring fallacy to convince Americans about republican’s governance. It is a bias used by most politicians to distract the audience from the real topic cleverly. The immigrant policy is an issue, but was the democratic party trying to prevent Trump’s presidency from introducing measures that would solve the crisis? the answer would be no, as the democrats opposed the approach used to eliminate immigrants issues.

The two texts failed to persuade the US citizens because of the errors and lack of evidence. In the first text, logos would have convinced the audience to use their reasoning based on the statistics. The advert tainted Hillary’s name without showing how she would facilitate illegal immigration. The second advert would have also deployed this mode of persuasion to show how far Trump’s presidency has addressed the crisis. Instead, a blame game was strategized to frustrate the democrats’ campaign and indicate that they were countering real progress. Consequently, failing to provide material facts in their publications, among other issues, may have led to republicans’ decline in popularity.

Conclusion

In summary, persuasion is more useful if the correct audience is identified and the right strategies are used. The two republican campaigns might have convinced the US citizens about Trump’s presidency if they did not mostly depend on the identified biases. The first text leans heavily on discrediting Trump’s opponent, while the second one tries to show how the democrats’ interference has stalled advancement. Conclusively, although the adverts used most of the persuasion techniques, the tone and approach were not as convincing. Hence, they did not successfully persuade the US citizens.