Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a Democrat born January 30th, 1882 in Hyde Park, New York who swiftly rose the ranks of politics, moving up from: New York State Senator to the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (a job held, coincidentally, by another Roosevelt with executive experience, Teddy) to the 44th Governor of New York and finally to the 32nd President of the United States. Mr. Roosevelt just happened to be the choice of Ronald Reagan in the elections of 1932, ’36, ’40, and ’44. Reagan, a descendant from a poor family in Illinois, was born on February 6th, 1911. He would grow up to first, become an actor as well as a military man, and later tried his hand in the political spectrum as a Democrat in 1948. Reagan would emerge as a Republican
…show more content…
With a casual tone, Reagan entices listeners by entitling them to the truth. This entitlement led to a series of confessions pertaining to his ignorance of the weapons trading, but takes full responsibility for these actions that supposedly compromise his deeply held beliefs. This confession appeals to ethos by giving Reagan credibility, like he isn’t afraid to admit when he’s wrong. However, Reagan did not go without a presentation of his achievements, intentionally using words like “right”, “proper”, and “great” when talking about the members of government who he appointed or put in place. Also touting the information that he brought “…new blood, new energy, and new credibility, and experience” using an anaphora to drill in the idea that these accolades were his, and due to him. Reagan’s experience tugged at peoples logos appeal by stating the facts and showing clearly that this minor slip up in policy should take nothing away from his integrity as a …show more content…
This however had no effect on their speaking techniques, which could be seen as being quite similar. FDR seemed to formally address the American people with tragic news of the loss of many American lives. Reagan spoke more casually and personally about a governmental error, letting the people into his life using anecdotal evidence taking the focus off the event and putting it on the man. This trait of being “personable” took Reagan a long way. With this approach, Reagan had to be conscious of social norms existent in present society as well as long held, deeply ingrained values that if changed, may have caused a shift in a voter’s political agenda. This approach is only reinforced by the mention of God, painting Reagan as a devout follower of Christ as with a majority of the American
With a casual tone, Reagan entices listeners by entitling them to the truth. This entitlement led to a series of confessions pertaining to his ignorance of the weapons trading, but takes full responsibility for these actions that supposedly compromise his deeply held beliefs. This confession appeals to ethos by giving Reagan credibility, like he isn’t afraid to admit when he’s wrong. However, Reagan did not go without a presentation of his achievements, intentionally using words like “right”, “proper”, and “great” when talking about the members of government who he appointed or put in place. Also touting the information that he brought “…new blood, new energy, and new credibility, and experience” using an anaphora to drill in the idea that these accolades were his, and due to him. Reagan’s experience tugged at peoples logos appeal by stating the facts and showing clearly that this minor slip up in policy should take nothing away from his integrity as a …show more content…
This however had no effect on their speaking techniques, which could be seen as being quite similar. FDR seemed to formally address the American people with tragic news of the loss of many American lives. Reagan spoke more casually and personally about a governmental error, letting the people into his life using anecdotal evidence taking the focus off the event and putting it on the man. This trait of being “personable” took Reagan a long way. With this approach, Reagan had to be conscious of social norms existent in present society as well as long held, deeply ingrained values that if changed, may have caused a shift in a voter’s political agenda. This approach is only reinforced by the mention of God, painting Reagan as a devout follower of Christ as with a majority of the American