As the 2016 Presidential Race finally comes to an end, it seems as if HRC has the victory in the bag. I think that it will be a close race, but in the end Ms. Clinton will come away with the win. Relating to the middle class is both difficult for both candidates. Trump is a billionaire and even though Hillary was brought up in middle class roots, she has far surpassed those and is now a very wealthy woman who has grown apart from the middle class. While both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton both focused on how to better the life of the middle class populations, both of the candidates went about addressing it in several different ways.

Ms. Clinton gave five ideas in her campaign in order to boost the economy. One of the main ideas behind her thoughts was to not raise taxes on the middle class. One proposed tactic to help with this was called the “Buffett Rule.” This stated that anyone who had an income over over one million dollars, must pay at the minimum 30% in taxes. Along with that, anyone who made over five million dollars would require a 4% surcharge. Named after close friend and billionaire, Warren Buffett, Hillary wants to use this proposed rule in order to persuade the middle class American people. Rhetorically speaking, if she can appeal to her specific audience of the middle class by persuading them by the proposed Buffett Rule, Hillary just gained a huge advantage over her opponent.

As we draw closer and closer to election day, both Donald Trump’s and Hillary Clinton’s campaigns are still just as surprising as they were when they began. As I am sure you all have heard, FBI director James Coney has decided to reopen and reinvestigate the Hillary Clinton email scandal that has already been thoroughly investigated earlier in the year. With all this added pressure on her plate, Hillary can’t budge with her campaign. She has to continue to work through adversity and gain her votes.

Ms. Clinton’s past rhetoric of attempting to paint a picture to her middle-class audience by telling a heartfelt and somber story of how she was brought up in a working, middle class family was effective at the time, it isn’t as useful anymore. This might have hit home with some voters, or at least up until Clinton said she was far removed from the middle class. With the reopening of the email case, she is losing fans and more importantly valuable votes from the middle class of our nation. Hillary just has to stick to her guns and not give up, especially with Trump being more favored than her in some of the polls and election websites.

Clinton’s best bet in not losing anymore votes from the middle class is to continue to attack Donald Trump. One effective strategy that she has previously done is openly bash him about his treatment and how he considers women. In this advertisement paid for by the Clinton Foundation, Hillary appeals to the feelings of her audience, particularly her female audience. Trying to make Trump appear unfit and unstable, in my opinion, is the only hope that Hillary Clinton has at this point to turn the odds back in her favor.

Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton is hoping for the best when gaining votes from the middle class for her campaign. Throughout her campaign, Hillary has declared that she has a new tax plan in order to help the middle class. According to her campaign website, it is an eight point tax plan with the first of the eight points reading, “Hillary is proposing middle class tax breaks to help families cope with the rising cost of every day expenses.” Despite her claims to the American people about tax cuts on the middle class, Hillary hasn’t even released any actual plan to lower the taxes on the middle class.

In her eight point plan, there isn’t a single time where Hillary speaks about lowering the income tax. Rather, she preaches on how she is going to raise taxes on the members of the  upper class. While this can be effective in her tax plan, is this method the right method to use to appeal to the best interests of the middle class? Back in March, Hillary told the Tax Policy Center that an income tax cut for low and middle class families was forthcoming. Well, Hillary. We are all still waiting. It is nearly election day for our country and this claim made in March that would have a direct positive effect on the middle class has seemed only to be a hoax. It has disappeared as quickly as it was brought up. Now is this an effective use of rhetoric by Hillary to gain her middle class votes? Absolutely it is. When voters from the middle class see this idea and claim, they immediately hop on the Hillary train, even though they should look a little deeper than the headlines about a proposal that is, “forthcoming.”

Flashback to the 1990’s for a moment and remember the presidency of democratic nominee Bill Clinton. His campaign and presidency was one that focused on several things. One was addressing income differences. Another would be how he assured the American people that each generation would fare better than those past financially wise. Along with both of those things, President Clinton also focused the majority of his attention to reconstructing the middle class. Now, do any of these things sound familiar with our current presidential race? Hillary Clinton is using the same tactics as former husband Bill did to gain votes to win the race. But what exactly did she use out of her husbands playbook in order to manipulate the middle class into voting for her?

 

How Has She Copied Bill?

In her speech in 2008, Hillary deemed the middle class, “Invisible American’s.” Very much similar to how ex-husband Bill said in his 1992 speech that he is, “fighting for the forgotten middle class.” Both nearly identical in word choice, Bill and Hillary both used this to try to bring a sense of ethos into the middle class to show that they recognize them, they appreciate their hard work, and that they think the middle class plays an integral part in America’s success. Another instance where they both shared nearly identical thoughts occurred in 1992 when Bill said he was, “tired of the dignity being stripped from blue collar work in America.” Hillary followed this up in October of 2014 when she said that, “there is nothing but dignity in hard work.” She made this claim shortly after talking about her middle class upbringing. By creating a sense of good will with her audience she is effectively gaining the attention and votes of the middle class voters. If she continues to use this rhetorical strategy, it will be nothing but beneficial to increasing her chances of winning the presidency, especially if it has already worked once before.

 

With it being October, we are drawing nearer and nearer to Election Day on November 8^th. Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton continue to clash heads with each other in order to persuade the remaining population of undecided voters. As I was watching the town hall format debate that occurred this week, I noticed that Secretary Clinton seemed far more interested in insulting and condemning Donald Trump for his proposals and ideas than she did on speaking about her middle class roots, something that she effectively spoke of in the first debate. She also didn’t fail to criticize him over the recent video that has emerged from his rude and inappropriate comments about women he made ten years ago. Is this an important issue and one that needs to be addressed? It absolutely is. Is this an issue that she needs to spend the majority of her time on? It absolutely is not. She needs to continue to sway the decisions of the undecided voters, many of who are in the middle class.

While she didn’t spend nearly any time and attention on the middle class in the most recent debate, Secretary Clinton has given members of the middle class plenty of reason to vote for her. She doesn’t want to raise taxes on the members of the middle class. In order to make their lives financially easier, Clinton proposed and was in favor of taxing other things, with one being that she was in favor of adding a 25% sales tax on guns. While I personally think she could find bigger and better things to rather than guns since I am a huge supporter of the second amendment and have grown up around firearms my whole life, this is an effective strategy. Many of her left wing supporters are in favor that stricter gun laws need to be implemented into the United States, especially after the many mass shootings our nation has faced over the past five years. By doing these things, she is slowly but surely increasing the gap between herself and Mr. Trump.

 

As the days and nights until November begin to wind down, the presidential race is all but winding down. Unlike Trump, Mrs. Clinton is rapidly losing middle-class votes and being that the middle class accounts for most of the votes in the election, this is something that she cannot afford to happen. Hillary Clinton’s lead over Donald Trump is decreasing by the date and her chance of winning the presidency is becoming slimmer and slimmer.

In order to appeal to gain the potential votes of the middle class, Mrs. Clinton used a blatant contrast between her father and Donald Trump’s father by saying that Donald was given a head start in life because his father was a “wealthy real estate developer.” Clinton then went on to say how her grandfather was an American factory worker and her father was a small businessman made her a “product of the American Middle Class.” This method to gain back voters from the middle class isn’t nearly as effective as providing statistics and benefits that one might gain from a Clinton presidency.

In her days in the senate, Hillary Clinton continued to claim that she was opposed to raising taxes on the middle class, but she constantly voted to raise them anyway. In 2008 however, Clinton voted to raise taxes on single people who were making as little as $41,500, and on married families that were making $83,000. Hillary thinks that she can slide her way around this issue, but unlike her emails, there is no way to erase the voting records.

If we are being honest here, Hillary Clinton hasn’t been associated with the middle class in close to thirty long years. Through her stories of her childhood and her families occupations growing up, a sense of ethos is established within the voting audience that can prove to be effective in gaining votes. But on the other hand, her taxing methods and proposals are absolute asinine when a voter looks back upon her senate days and sees how untrustworthy of a person that she is. Though unorthodox, Mrs. Clinton’s Rhetoric is proving to be effective in the election. This should make up for an interesting end to the 2016 presidential election.