George W. Bush
In 2000, George W. Bush was elected the President of the United States (ethos). During his run for president in St. Charles Missouri, he talked about social security towards the people of America, but mainly targeted the seniors citizens (pathos). He said that he wanted to stop ‘playing politics’ with social security and help keep the elderly safe while helping others benefit (logos). He brings up that the old politics scare the seniors and he’s going to get rid of them. He also says that he will not have the government take control of what money is yours and you will benefit from taxation rather than sink into it (to the younger).
In Bush’s speech, he had some good devices that helped his argument. Cause and Effect: ‘If the Government takes over social security, then you won’t be allowed to invest and see how you fit.’ Repetition: ‘We need to keep the elders safe rather than frighten them with old style politics’ and used this about 3 times in his speech. But he did include some fallacies in his argument. Ad Hominem: “ And by the way, don’t be afraid to talk to those open-minded Democrats and discerning independents.." Lastly he made the mistake of using Faulty Analogy. He was talking about how social security needs to stop scaring old people. Then he shifts to how he's worried about our military. He lacked comparing those two subjects.
This speech wasn't effective because It had lots of fallacies, lacked evidence, and bounced from different subjects without any transitions.
In 2008, Barack Obama was elected President of the United States (ethos). During his running in Philadelphia, he spoke about racial standards and problems towards the people of color and others who are not treated equally (pathos). He was saying that everyone is equal and should be treated the same no matter what they look like and where they come from (logos).
He used lots of devices of the rhetorical triangle to make a solid argument such as; Diction: " It was stained by this nation's original sin of slavery..." This represented powerful connotation by the way he explained how slavery broke our colonies away and has led to an only resolution to future generations. He also used a source of analogy. " And yet words on a parchment would not be enough to deliver slaves from bondage, or provide men and women of every color and creed their full rights and obligations as citizens of the United States. What would be needed were Americans in successive generations who were willing to do their part — through protests and struggles, on the streets and in the courts, through a civil war and civil disobedience, and always at great risk — to narrow that gap between the promise of our ideals and the reality of their time." He was comparing the Declaration of Independence to the rights of people, saying that people deserve to be treaty equally. But yet he used one fallacy; Ad Hominem: " That it's solely based on the desire of the wide eyed liberals to purchase racial reconciliation on the cheap."
Overall, this speech was effective because it had strong rhetorical devices and backed up his facts with lots of evidence.