The Democratic party nominated Hillary Clinton to hopefully inherit the presidency from the Barack Obama. While Obama had little trouble galvanizing the African-American vote, Clinton has struggled to do the same, especially in the battle-ground state, Ohio. In order to change this, Clinton invited Lebron James to campaign for her at her rally in Cleveland, Ohio. Lebron James accepted the invitation and employed the rhetoric of ethos and martyria on Clinton’s behalf.

Ethos

Lebron James grew up in Akron, Ohio. He was raised by a single mother in an inner city neighborhood. James acknowledged this and the odds against him in his NBA Finals Speech in 2013, “I’m LeBron James. From Akron, Ohio. From the inner city. I am not even supposed to be here.” Yet, James beat the odds, embraced basketball, and is now one of the best basketball players in the National Basketball Association. In 2016, James led the Cavaliers to Cleveland’s first NBA title, immediately becoming the hometown hero. James did not forget his humble beginning though. James even made his own foundation with the goal of helping children in Ohio who came from backgrounds similar to his. Essentially, James provided hope and help for the people of Ohio on the court and off the court. This in turn served to build up his ethos among Ohioans.

Martryia 

Clinton’s recent message to African-American voters is to vote. James’ seized the opportunity at the rally to further this message through the use of martyria. In rhetoric, martyria is confirming something based on their personal experience. James declared, “The number one main reason I’m here is because of Hillary and what she believes in. I want people to understand now I grew up in the inner city. And I know the whole notion of getting out and voting. And I was one of those kids, and I was around a community, that was like, our vote doesn’t matter. But it really does. It really, really does. We have to get out and make sure we vote.” In his message, James referred to his past experience and his past belief that his vote did not matter. He used his ethos and martyria to acknowledge the audience’s belief and relate to them. James then took it a step farther to confirm that their votes matter and inspire people to vote.  Through these two rhetorical devices, Lebron James successfully encouraged Ohioans to vote, just like Clinton hoped.

He was supposed to be the secret weapon. A wildly popular ex-president whose broad appeal would cement a Hillary victory. Three days away from the election and the supposed Great Communicator, Bill Clinton, is nowhere to be found. On the campaign trail he’s been met with great admiration, but also with a distinct rancor that not even our sitting president has had to face. Protestors shouting “BILL’S A RAPIST!” or “BILL IS CORRUPT!” has become such a regular occurrence that Bill has been delegated to small, easily-controlled town hall environments.

For die-hard fans of the Bill Clinton White House—this election has been disappointing. Voters who were looking forward to a blast-to-the-past time in politics when Bill Clinton was galvanizing democrats with his southern charm have been greeted by a different Bill. A Bill that at times has become unhinged and defensive; contradictory to the cool, easygoing politician from Arkansas that most Americans fell in love with. Instead, he has foolishly spent his time on the trail defending his presidency and not vouching for his wife.

However, in defense of Bill, this is uncharted territory. Bill is attempting to pioneer a new role, the First Husband. And compound that with the fact that he’s an ex-president with baggage of his own means Bill is in a precarious positon. A weary positon that has been under attack by the Trump campaign during this whole election cycle. Three days away from election day and it can be said with confidence that the Trump team succeeded in nullifying Bill’s effectiveness.

From the start, the Trump campaign mounted an all-out offensive on Bill and his role as a surrogate. This isn’t a mark of ingenuity from the Trump team, but a route that had been explored and mastered by a 90’s Republican led House. Because of Bill’s prominence, he has a litany of failures as a public servant to attack.  Furthermore, the Trump campaign has called into question the legitimacy and ethics of the Clinton Foundation which has created headaches for Hillary. Also, because of our current political climate, especially regarding Black Lives Matter—Bill’s popularity with millennials and blacks is fleeting.

Ultimately, what may be the cause of Bill’s undoing is that the Democratic Party is not the same party is was during 1992. If on November 8, Hillary becomes the presumptive president-elect she will have done so in spite of Bill and not because of him.

Alicia Machado

Clinton is known for having a herd of famous surrogates supporting her campaign. She has strategically picked allies with compelling stories to target Trump and relate to voters, especially women. Due to the recent Trump scandal where he talked about kissing, groping and trying to have sex with women during a 2005 conversation, Clinton has taken this opportunity and exploited it for all that it’s worth. Alicia Machado, the first winner of Miss Universe after Trump purchased the program, is one of Clinton’s “enthusiastic allies with a compelling story.” Clinton’s campaign claims they strategically waited to tap into the Machado story knowing that Trump’s treatment of women would arise as an issue on it’s own. According to the Washington Post, “Emails released by WikiLeaks show that the Clinton campaign was aware of Machado’s story in December 2015,” but yet she waited to release the “October Surprise” during a time of weakness for Trump to evoke drama.

Machado’s abusive treatment from Trump started in 1997, which is not that long ago realistically. Trump “fat-shamed” her on national television and later on referred to her as “Miss Piggy” after she gained some weight. Crooks & Liars claims, “This is harassment. Workplace harassment. Sexual harassment. It caused Machado to suffer from eating disorders for years afterward.” Trump abused his power as her employer, causing her to become humiliated and physically damaged. Many voters are perceiving this behavior as carrying through to his presidency if he gets elected. Voters are worried he would mistreat his White House employees and abuse his power to settle every imagined grudge, proving yet again that he can never, ever be given that power.

The most important part of the Machado case, is that Trump cannot deny that it ever happened, along with the earlier mentioned 2005 incident because of tangible proof of the truth. This really displays the character of Trump and those running his campaign. If they can’t counter the truth, they’ll just try and distract everyone with meaningless lies. After Machado’s weight gain, she was photographed with Trump working out at a gym. He commented how she loves to eat and mocked her for her Latino accent, calling her “Miss Housekeeping.” Trump’s campaign tries to cover up the story with an obvious lie explaining how he encouraged her to go to the gym to benefit her personal health when really he just didn’t want to be looked at as associating with fat women. Having a president that is constantly trying to avoid the truth instead of claiming his faults and enacting a change is terrifying to citizens. Machado has become a powerful surrogate for Clinton and because of her claim, over eleven more women victimized by Trump’s behavior have come forward with compelling stories impling his false morals. Is this really the kind of president you want being a role model to our country?

 

It is no surprise to anyone that Hillary Clinton has a tough time reaching out to millennials. It’s pretty hard to shore up the millennial vote when you’re a candidate that is supposed to represent everything they hate. Clinton is an established politician, moderate democrat, and her hawkish demeanor is all too reminiscent of a nagging parent. Millennial outreach is an especially difficult task for the Clinton campaign because of the success of Bernie Sanders and the lasting grievances Bernie bros are carrying.

Much like Trump, Sanders ran a populist campaign, however, Bernie’s was predicated on the future—instead of Trump’s take-me-back-to-1952 campaign. Sanders primary race was perhaps the strongest candidacy in regards to mobilizing the young. It for this very reason that Hillary Clinton understands the importance of Bernie’s influence on the general election. The question now is whether or not Bernie understands his role in the Clinton campaign.

As of right now Bernie and Hillary can wholeheartedly agree on one thing: Donald Trump is unqualified to be the POTUS. The Clinton campaign has delegated Bernie to spots where he feels communicatively comfortable: his New England area and college campuses. What is noteworthy is that whenever Bernie stumps on behalf of Hillary he tends to focus on everything but actually mentioning Hillary. Bernie is an interesting surrogate because his rallies feel like a shadow campaign. He’s continued with his primary stump speeches—making the %1 pay their fair share, college affordability, and fair trade.

Because of this the Clinton campaign is in a sticky situation. Bernie is accomplishing his surrogate role by staying with his primary rhetoric that did such a good job at galvanizing the young vote, and Hillary Clinton doesn’t have to make mention of those issues that might alienate some moderate democrats. However, the Clinton camp must make a concerted effort to restrain Bernie and not let him overshadow or undermine the actual candidate.

It’s the end of October, but not the end of October surprises. This past weekend the Clinton campaign received a blow when the F.B.I. announced they were re-opening their investigation of Clinton’s emails after new emails were discovered on Anthony Weiner’s computer. This has caused media and news outlets to seek comments from Clinton’s surrogates, including Joe Biden, who responded with paromologia and exouthenismos rhetoric in an interview.

Paromologia

Michael Smerconish interviewed the current Vice President Joe Biden, and they discussed a wide range of issues. Unsurprisingly, the most recent October surprise came up in their conversation. Biden echoed Clinton’s call for the F.B.I. to publicly release the emails they discovered. However, he also added his own two cents. Smerconish commented that if Clinton had released her emails in the beginning, these current email revelations would not pose a problem. Biden replied, “Well that’s true, but I don’t know where these emails came from.” The Vice President employed paromologia in his response. In rhetoric, paromologia happens when one admits to a lesser point in order to make a more important point. Biden conceded the smaller argument about Clinton releasing her emails in an effort to continue the Clinton campaign narrative that no one knows details about the emails and they are inconsequential, which he attempted to do when he said he did not know where the emails came from.

 

Exouthenismos

Biden changed his rhetorical response when Smerconish told him the emails came from Anthony Weiner. He then used exouthenismos, which is an expression of contempt in rhetoric. Biden responded with, “Well, oh God, Anthony Weiner. I should not comment on Anthony Weiner. I’m not a big fan. I wasn’t before he got in trouble. So I shouldn’t comment on Anthony Weiner.” This was a good rhetorical move because it condemned Weiner. More importantly, it shifted the focus from Clinton to Weiner and his character instead. Though Smerconish went on the attack in the interview, Biden held his own through his rhetorical application of paromologia and exouthenismos.

If you haven’t noticed, Barack Obama really wants Hillary Clinton to be president. He’s scheduled to appear this week at three major states Hillary needs to put the race away for good: Florida, Ohio, and North Carolina. Obama’s heavy campaigning is unprecedented for a sitting president, and earlier this week he announced around 150 down-the-ticket endorsements.

So why is President Obama so eager to assume a lame duck role? Well, I have three theories: Obama, the golfer, has his eyes set on a currently weak GPA tour, after 8 years of republicans who obstruct justice and abdicate their duties he wants to get far far away, or he desperately wants to hand down his legacy to a candidate who is ready to build on top of it.

Honestly, as much as I’d love to believe in Barack’s 7-iron, he’s probably concerned about how historians will judge him post-presidency. And if a candidate like Trump who has promised to repeal Obamacare, shoot down every executive order Obama made, and took about 6 years to call him a U.S. citizen—gets elected, he understands his presidency will be forever tainted and undermined by the damage a Trump presidency is capable of.

What I’m trying to say is that Obama doesn’t care about getting Hillary, Bernie, Joe, or a liberal-arts graduate who lives in Mom’s basement elected—he just doesn’t want to get a republican elected. Obama’s campaign rhetoric has been noteworthy this election cycle. “All that progress goes out the window if we don’t make the right choice just four weeks from today,” Obama said at an Oct. 11 appearance in Greensboro, N.C. Statements like this have been common from Obama this past month.

Now, Barack Obama is probably the best politician in the world right now. He understands that if not for a constitutional amendment he would have whipped any candidate the republicans threw at him. So Obama’s campaign strategy this cycle isn’t about Hillary Clinton—it’s about Barack Obama. He’s telling people that this is just as much about him than it is about Trump or Clinton. Obama’s even using some incumbent strategies. He has entrenched the U.S. into an international struggle with the undergoing Battle of Mosul. And he’s used his high-profile on platforms like snapchat, Instagram, and late-night shows to spread the word. He’s pretty much running for a third-term.

Enemy?

Hillary Clinton, who was once the candidate enemy of Barack Obama, is now campaigning for president with Obama’s full support. During the time they were simultaneously running for presidency, Obama said some hateful claims about Clinton to convince voters she was unfit for office so he could win. It is interesting now to see him try to justify those claims to convince voters to think the opposite of what he once said. Obama made an ad in 2008 that was condemning, attacking, and questioning Hillary as his opponent.  His main claim from the add was, “Hillary Clinton, she’ll say anything and change nothing.” These attack ads are extremely effective especially now that they are being dug up and used against Clinton in the 2016 election, even though Obama wants her to win. Politico quoted Trump saying, “I rarely agree with President Obama- however he is 100% correct about Crooked Hillary Clinton. Great ad!” The video ad is prime bait that Trump can, and is, using against Clinton claiming even her surrogates don’t see her as a good president.

Friend?

On the other hand, the man who has spent the last eight years in the White House leading this country and learning what it takes to be the President of the United States should have a good idea of what type of person would be fit to be President next. I personally have come to value his opinions highly, but I believe most citizens are overlooking what he has to say about the candidates. We should be taking into consideration that he is whole-heartedly supporting Hillary Clinton as president and has happily accepted to be one of her surrogates. As the president, he is obligated to support certain people and do certain things, but according to Obama in regards to the candidates he said to CNN, “Can I just say, I am really into electing Hillary Clinton. This is not me going through the motions here. I really, really, really want to elect Hillary Clinton,” Obama said. “We take for granted sometimes what is steady, and what is true. Hillary Clinton is steady. And she’s true.” A voter should take both sides of the argument into consideration to decide if Obama is being genuine in his support of Hillary or not. In my opinion, putting all the time and effort into being Clinton’s surrogate, implies that Obama does actually want her to be president. The attack ad from 2008 I think was simply him trying to play the political game of doing whatever it takes to beat out the other candidates.

The Clinton Campaign is swinging for the fences in an attempt to swing traditionally red states to blue states, especially Arizona. Chelsea Clinton recently attended a rally at Arizona State University  in order to galvanize young, college age voters’ support for her mother. She appealed to these voters largely through the tone of her setting and her use of pathos.

The Setting 

The current campaign cycle is thick with tension and negativity. However, Chelsea Clinton deviated from this at the ASU rally. The room at the ASU rally held only 750 people. This provided a more intimate setting than most Hillary Clinton rallies. The ASU rally atmosphere set the stage for a more personal connection between Chelsea Clinton and the audience. Clinton even wore a t-shirt to send the message the rally was meant to be a laid back discourse between her and the audience. The rhetorical gamble of the casual setting paid off, and resonated with audience members. Yudidt Nonthe, an 18 year-old student at ASU, noticed Clinton’s wardrobe choice, and stated,, “I feel like it was total conversation between everyone. The room was super friendly … She was super genuine and kind.” Clinton’s implementation of a low key, personal setting successfully made people comfortable. This is in turn, helped them connect to Clinton and her message because she appeared relatable, trustworthy, and as one of them.

Pathos

In addition to the tame setting she created, Chelsea Clinton reached out to voters through pathos. According to Arizona Central, the majority of the audience’s main concern was “higher education funding.” Clinton talked about her mother’s plan for free college, and she used to pathos to help the idea resonate with the young adults in the room. Clinton proclaimed, “Being too intimidated by the cost of education should not determine what your dreams are.” This statement appealed to positive emotions like will power and happiness and dismissed the emotions of fear and uncertainty caused by lack of funds for colleges. Clinton’s pathos gave people an idea of the hope that comes with the election of Clinton, and a reason why they should vote for her. After the rally, Nonthe said, “Her daughter made me feel way better about my decision.” In all, Clinton’s discourse and employment of pathos served to convince people of her message and ease their fears.

O’Keefe’s Video Unveil

James O’Keefe is a conservative undercover journalist for Project Veritas who recently leaked a video of two men who work for Clinton’s campaign. Robert Creamer and Scott Foval were discussing ways to provoke Trump supporters at his rallies. The big argument between Trump and Clinton surrogates is whether O’Keefe is a vicious liar out to get Clinton or if he unveiled what citizens deserve and should know about Clinton’s motives. Many people, including Clinton’s surrogate Christine Quinn, are arguing that O’Keefe falsely recorded and edited the undercover excerpts to purposely frame Creamer and Foval. She continuously questioned the validity of the video clip saying it is so easy for media specialists to “fudge” footage to depict any kind of meaning. The most regarded statement from the video was stated in an article by The Washington Free Beacon   that said, “Honestly, it is not hard to get some of these assholes to pop off,” Foval said. “It’s a matter of showing up to want to get into the rally in a Planned Parenthood t-shirt or, you know, Trump is a Nazi, you could message to draw them out and draw them to punch you.” If in fact these actions are true regarding Clinton and her campaign team, it portrays an undignified character that voters are not going to want to support.

The Harsh Reality Of Social Media

Surrogates are often seen giving speeches defending their candidate regarding an undesirable action or statement the candidate may have done or said. The rhetoric of this generation of elections is so easily turned upside down because of our access to social media. Junkyard journalism has become a big part of political campaigns because of the malicious attacks into the already public lives of the candidates. Forty years ago, it would have taken weeks for this scandal to be seen across the country. Because of new technology, a voter can see the O’Keefe video on TV, Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter in a matter of five minutes. Mobile technology has allowed easy on-the-go access to the most recent news updates and can inform citizens the instant a new article gets published. Influencer outreach has become a way for candidates to attack and defend themselves in social media by directly connecting with reporters, bloggers, and online activists one-on-one behind the scenes. Candidates can use the media for rapid response by journalists to push back against attacks and unfavorable coverage by gatekeepers to reach voters directly. Surrogates lately are spending just as much time defending their campaign against hateful claims as they are promoting the goals of the candidate.

On October 13, Michelle delivered one of the best speeches given by a Clinton surrogate thus far. Obama’s speech was arguably better than the one she gave at the DNC because of the immediacy of her words. Obama spent most of her time discussing the Trump tape that disparaged women and glamorized sexual assault. Her speech was a gold standard when it came to what a surrogate should accomplish for a campaign—It was incisive, topical, and deeply moving in a way that Hillary Clinton has never been.

One of the reasons that Michelle Obama is such an effective surrogate is because out of all of Clinton’s high-profile surrogates she is the lone Washington outsider. Michelle Obama can earnestly take the politics away from an issue and talk about it from the perspective of a mother, wife, and concerned activist. At one point she said, “I know it’s a campaign, but this isn’t about politics.” She went on to bolster her argument by speaking authoritatively about her initiative, Let Girls Learn; A program that the First Lady herself has played a huge role in creating and advocating. A program that boosts Obama’s credibility as a champion for women’s rights, and makes Obama’s scathing speech all the more debasing for Trump.

For the past eight years, Michelle Obama’s favorability ratings have been fantastic. Because of this she has become the ultimate weapon is this campaign. It is not coincidence that the Clinton camp sent her to New Hampshire, a state that along with two others (Pennsylvania & Virgina) will cement a Clinton victory. All three are states that will be decided by the middle-class, college-educated women who deeply admire the first lady.

Ultimately, Michelle Obama has distinguished herself from the rest of the Clinton surrogate pack. Last Thursday she reiterated the overarching narrative that the Clinton campaign is creating ‘Donald Trump is wildly unfit to be President of the United States’. She is a weapon that the Trump campaign has absolutely no, (not even Melania Trump), answer to and just might cost them this election.