Bamboozled by Trump, but not Persuaded by the President

Obama

On Tuesday evening, in the highly sought after ‘swing state’ of Ohio, President Obama offered a direct warning to the working class voters that Trump has won over:

“the notion that this guy is your champion, the notion that this guy is going to fight for working people, when his entire life, he didn’t have time for anybody who wasn’t rich or wasn’t a celebrity, who wouldn’t let you in to one of his hotels unless you were cleaning the room, wouldn’t let you on to one of his golf courses unless you were mowing the fairway? Come on!

But does this warning from President Obama trump the candidates previous appeal to these voters? I think not for several reasons.

First of all, President Obama historically lacks credibility with this audience as evidenced by his lower approval ratings among this group. His lower credibility (or ethos) means that messages will not be received with as much gravity compared to if someone who had more credibility with the working class was to speak. It could’ve been more strategic to have someone like Mitt Romney, who has demonstrated success among this population in the past as well as demonstrated a lack of support for Trump.

President Obama also did not appeal to the logos of the audience, as he could have employed more empirical evidence. He offered examples, but not hard numbers which can also be persuasive to some listeners. I think it could have been effective to add more anecdotal evidence as well.

The speech, although persuasive to some, did not appeal to the working class voters, especially those who do not see President Obama as a strong source. We’ll see if Trump decides to reply to the ineffective remarks.

 

2 thoughts on “Bamboozled by Trump, but not Persuaded by the President

  1. I was very pleased to read your blog post cause a few weeks back I had written about Obama and this quote and how it debunks Trump and his representation of the working class. I was glad I got to see it from a different perspective. It is very true that people may just take Obama’s words as just stories without any hard evidence. A lot of people would just think he’s saying these things just because he is on the opposing team. People are conscerned with big impacts and Obama would have proved his theory more if he were to back it up with clear evidence because a lot of times that is the only way to show someone what you’re trying to say. The part that I have to disagree with is that Obama is more credible when it comes to the working class because he himself has started from the bottom and worked way harder than Trump can imagine to be where he is today. The white working class individuals do not agree with Obama due to their concern with his tax regulations and Obamacare. That being said, I thought it was very insightful how you analyzed Obama’s speech towards ethos and logos because those are always important when speaking to an audience.

  2. This is a very interesting post, and I’m glad that you used data to validate your claim that the working class may not view Obama as a good messenger for this criticism of Trump. It’s sort of analogous to how many libertarians don’t take Obama’s criticism of Trump as “disrespecting the constitution seriously” when Obama approved provisions in the NDAA, expanded wiretapping, etc. It’s certainly a clever and punchy attack by Obama, but you’re right to point out that he doesn’t dive into any policy specifics there. I think he could, and that’s why I think you’re right that this argument falls very short.

Comments are closed.