In another relatively slow week in the rhetoric of Vice Presidential candidates, mainly because of well-behaved Presidential counterparts, Mike Pence and Tim Kaine have spent little time in the media spotlight. While both Vice Presidential candidates have spent time traveling and leading rallies in important states for both of their respective campaigns, little time has been spent trying to defend Donald Trump or prove Hilary Clinton’s legitimacy. This has given the two VP candidates time to address alliances within their parties, focus on issues central to their campaigns, and speak to the significance of their Presidential counterpart moving into the White House next.

In an interview with MSNBC on Tuesday, Tim Kaine came to the somewhat-comical realization that he will have a female boss for the first time in his career. The idea of having a female boss wasn’t what made him chuckle during his interview with Rachel Maddow but the fact that he was just now realizing that he could be working for his first and potentially the most powerful female “boss” in the history of the United States. “Wow, I hadn’t thought of it that way,” Kaine chuckled as he pondered the significance of what was happening within the Democratic Party. While humorous at first, Kaine’s rhetoric quickly switched to that of a more serious nature as he touched on a possible concern for many male voters from both parties—a woman’s ability to be President. Kaine is excited to run alongside Clinton as she attempts to become the first woman President, saying that his Vice Presidency would normalize the notion that “strong men should definitely support strong women.” This was a strong rhetorical move by Kaine as he fully backed the idea of himself supporting a strong woman and called other men to do the same.

As Kaine focused on the significance of his “boss”, Pence focused on personal friendships and friends of the Republican Party. As Trump makes more outlandish statements and has more allegations come out against him, prominent Republicans and party supporters have begun dropping their support of the Republican nominee. Over the last few days, Pence has repeated a phrase, a two-word call powerfully directed at the entire Republican party, “come home.” This rhetorical claim is incredibly impactful as it calls the entire Republican party to rally together over a sense of “home” or “oneness” that seems to be missing from the Republican party as of recent. As Pence talked about rallying together, he was quick to name-drop Speaker of the House Paul Ryan who has held Trump at “an arm’s length” the entire campaign, and how they have been friends for over 15 years. Not only have they been friends and associates, but Pence was quick to say that Ryan and his team will be in support of Trump and Pence and getting the Republican Party back into the White House.

Overall, it was a relatively slow week in the dialogue and rhetoric of Vice Presidential candidates but this down period nearing election day allowed for the two VP candidates to speak on the significance of their Presidential counterpart potentially taking office, party friendships, and rallying together in order to find success as November 8^th quickly approaches.

Throughout class discussion, we have talked a lot about October Surprises and how they can affect the presidential candidates remaining campaign in the final days. How candidates respond to the release of whatever the “surprise” may be is very crucial to their accusation being overlooked or forgiven by the American people, especially if the surprise is inappropriate, offending, etc. When it comes to their reaction, they need to ensure that their rhetorical response is appropriate and will not further harm their chance of winning the election. As these surprises leaked to the media are a rhetorical act of another party, the candidate being targeted usually will face some kind of drama or criticism that will be meant to test their leadership or prove that they are unfit for their running role.

 
What I have discovered about October Surprises as I have been paying closer attention to them during this election is that they don’t just affect the presidential candidates but the vice presidential candidates as well. Just over the course of the last few days, Hillary Clinton`s running mate, Tim Kaine, has experienced what it is like to be a target of October Surprises. He has been threatened by WikiLeaks over Twitter. WL  has tweeted several messages directed at Kaine. On October 20, they tweeted, “We have a surprise in store for @TimKaine.” On October 23, WL tweeted again, “We have a surprise for @TimKaine” and used the hashtag #TKSurprise. See this link to read more about the Twitter threats.

 

According to CBS News, Kaine has “shrugged off” the threat and explains that he has nothing to be “overly embarrassed about” but that he does have “a temper, so I mean, I imagine I`ve got an email or two out there that people might find unusual.” Kaine also said that the motives for the WL`s releases “made the documents untrustworthy” and said that “these are connected to a Russian government propaganda effort to destabilize the election.” The rhetoric of his response seems to match the rhetoric of his running candidate who has made several comments about Russia and their role in attempting to “affect the outcome of the election.” Read this link to discover more about how Clinton`s rhetorical stance on Russia shows that she believes they are attempting to “influence our election.” To read more about what Kaine said about the threats, view this link.

What do you think about the rhetorical stance Kaine is taking on the threats towards him? Do you think he should respond differently or be more proactive? Most importantly, what do you think about Kaine matching his response to the same response his running mate has said about the Russian Government as he is trying to relay the same rhetorical message she is when it comes to the Russian Government?

Sources:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/tim-kaine-shrugs-off-targeted-wikileaks-threat/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/oct/19/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-blames-russia-putin-wikileaks-rele/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/24/tim-kaine-wikileaks-warning-i-suspect-its-big-yawn/

https://www.yahoo.com/news/vice-presidential-nominee-shrugs-off-threat-wikileaks-182835074–election.html

____________________________________________________________

Erin Shattles

Who Is the Liar?

---

In the closing weeks of this years 2016 presidential election, campaign ads have become more and more clever. This ad in particular, that was released two weeks ago, shows the angle the Clinton campaign continues to implement in order to ruin the reputation of both Donald Trump and vice presidential candidate Mike Pence. By using an ‘attack ad’, Clinton shows Americans that vice presidential candidate Mike Pence is doing a decent job as a surrogate for Trump, by defending him in interviews, but when he is asked direct questions about his running mates’ positions during the vice presidential debate, Pence completely contradicts himself.

 

Indefensible

---

This ad is clearly apart of what Edwin Diamond and Stephen Bates would refer to as phase 3 of political ads known as ‘Attack Spots,’ which are used to reduce the credibility of the opposing candidate. By using this ad, the Clinton campaign makes Governor Pence look extremely inconsistent, and the use of a ‘Negative Ad‘ in order to tear down an opponent could prove to be extremely useful at this point in the race. The Trump campaigns’ best argument against Hillary Clinton is that she is an untrustworthy liar, but this ad flips their position on its head by saying the exact same thing about Mike Pence. They may have chose this avenue in order to manipulate undecided voters minds’ to be more narrow when contemplating who to vote for.

Only One Conclusion

---

The Clinton campaign does an excellent job at proving Mike Pence was making dishonest claims by comparing his answers during the debate with those of his and his running mates’ past answers to questions about things like claims made on Vladimir Putin. Hillary Clinton is known for saying things similar to, ‘Make up your own mind.’ This is an effective approach, especially during presidential debates, because it puts the ball in the voters court allowing them the freedom to think on their own. Interestingly enough, this ad does not follow that pattern.  This ad leaves the American audience with only one conclusion, and that is that Mike Pence and Donald Trump continuously contradict themselves and each other, proving that they are the untrustworthy ones.

Which Vice Presidential Candidate won the social media debate? In most cases, looking at the debate from a rhetoric point of view, Pence wins in most aspects but on social media is the story the same? On Twitter and Facebook Mike Pence was trending on a greater volume than Kaine but Google showed something quite different. On Twitter “@Mike_Pence grabbed 60 percent of the conversation” and “picked up 22,000 new Twitter followers” while Kaine grabbed 40 percent of the conversation and “attracted 15,000 new followers.” Just like Trump, Pence grabbed the conversation on Facebook and Twitter but does that mean that Pence and Trump are the favorites, most likely not, it means that their topics are creating the most interest with the viewers watching the debate, good and bad interest. On the other hand, “more users googled Kaine (55 percent) than Pence (45 percent).” The Internet is becoming more and more important in Presidential campaigns because computers and access to them are becoming more and more prevalent. Of course Trump attracts a lot of attention on social media because his status before he ran for President. Even though Pence grabbed the a majority of attention on social media, “Kaine ended up winning the overall top social moment, with this jab at Pence: “He is asking everybody to vote for somebody that he cannot defend.'”

So, is the impact of social media in Presidential campaigns and debates a positive or a negative? It’s harder to decipher the tweets and posts of hundreds of thousands of people because everyone uses different language to express the same thing such as sarcasm, it’s harder for someone to understand a tweet than it is to watch someone say something in person and follow their body movements and facial expressions. In the case of the Vice Presidential Debate, millions of tweets were going out at one time, good and bad towards both candidates. The one overarching good quality of social media is the outreach that it contains. Social media keeps so many more people informed, whether accurate or inaccurate, more and more people care and gain interest because of the outreach of social media. Does the number of tweets and google searches correlate with who will win the election? In the last election it did, but will it foreshadow this election also?

Source:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/mike-pence-tim-kaine-on-social-media-vice-presidential-debate/

As I have been writing on the rhetoric of vice presidential candidates and their communication during the election process, I have started to wonder what their role actually entails once their running mate is elected into office. What are the VP candidates responsible for exactly and why does it seem that they don’t communicate with the public quite as much as the president and other politicians do? I decided to conduct a little research to find out.

I discovered that historically, the role of the VP has slightly changed over the years and varies from VP to VP. Once a VP is selected to run alongside the presidential nominee, they appear on advertisements of the campaigning president. It has also been said that the VP nomination can sometimes make or break a presidential candidates potential for winning the election. As you don’t hear from the VP as much during the election process and especially after, you still see their name alongside their running mate on posters, stickers, buttons, etc. This alone is rhetoric as their nomination functions to communicate to the audience in a way that supports their running mate. It is all presidential nominees hopes that their VP selection compliments their running position and the audience understands and views the nomination in a positive, supportive way to the potential presidential candidate. The communicative function of the VP during the election process is to better express this rhetoric of the president and ensure their communicative and campaigning function is carried out with support. But what happens after the election is won?

After the election is won, one of the VP`s main functions is to preside over the Senate and oversee various operations associated with that role, while accompanying the president and serving as a ceremonial assistant to them. A lot of times, it has also depended on their involvement before and their relationship with the president at the time. It seems that their communication once elected into office is actually more internal as they act as the preceding officer of the Senate. As their main power is the ability to cast votes responsible for tie-breaking decisions among the Senate, their main communicative function is to understand the people and support the best decisions for them while presiding over the Senate to make those tie-breaking decisions based on the communication of the people and what may be best for them.

I feel that is important to note that their job is important and although they may not communicate as much with the American people once in office, their role is still an important part to the functioning of our political system. As they communicate more internally, the rhetoric of their communication with the Senate indeed reflects decisions that are made and how our political system functions, even if we do not hear it. Check out this short video to find out more! Comment your thoughts below! What is your opinion on their name appearing on all advertisements during campaigning processes but not hearing from them as much after? If you have had experience with hearing more about VP`s after elections, I`d for you to share examples of their communication that is not so internal.

Sources:

http://www.livescience.com/5113-vice-president.html

https://www.quora.com/What-does-the-Vice-President-of-the-United-States-do

http://www.scholastic.com/teachers/article/presidents-and-vice-presidents-jobs

http://people.howstuffworks.com/vice-president4.htm

________________________________________________________

Erin Shattles

In what has been a seemingly boring week in the October race for the Presidential election, neither of the two candidates have had to do much work to cover for their Presidential counterpart or present their plans on important issues that may be potentially debated in the final debate this Wednesday evening. Following a week of sexual assault allegations, Republican Vice Presidential nominee Mike Pence is probably very thankful for a relatively slow week while Democrat nominee Tim Kaine has had to do little “attack” work on Trump and the Republican party thanks to the continuous number of women coming forward with allegations. In saying that, the two have been able to address issues specifically regarding their campaigns and plans for the future, finally providing some insight to voters on where these candidates stand and how they could potentially represent our country. Kaine has spent the last couple of days in Detroit delivering his plan on how to fight poverty while highlighting his own background to explain why he sees confronting poverty as a “moral responsibility“. This was important for two reasons: first, because it gave insight into some of Kaine’s policy ideas and potential plans for improvement and second, because it finally gave voters insight into who Kaine actually is as an individual and as an American and why he views poverty the way he does. After the first Vice Presidential debate, little could be said of either of the two candidates as both parties attacked and defended their respective Presidential counterpart, leading to voters knowing almost nothing personally of the two VP candidates. This speech, while not huge or incredibly noteworthy, at the very least allowed voters to peer a little more into the background of Kaine and made him a little more human and vote-worthy to the average American. Pence, while not having to defend Trump and his sexual assault allegations, did have another adverse situation facing him and the Republican party this week. Early Sunday morning, a GOP office in Hillsborough, North Carolina was firebombed and burned to the ground. On Tuesday, Pence visited the charred remains of the office and delivered a speech, saying “I wanted to come by to call attention to this cowardly attack on our supporters in North Carolina and to no less extent an attack on the American political system. This was an act of political terrorism.” This cowardly act of arson allowed Pence to do two things. One, it presented him with a very easy opportunity to attack the Democrat Party and label them as “cowards” and “arsons” and two, it gave him a chance to encourage and praise Republican supporters for the way they have rallied around the community and around one another.

Overall, this was a very slow week for both Vice Presidential candidates but it did allow the two nominees to encourage their respective parties while also allowing viewers to finally begin to see who the two candidates are on a more personal, intimate level.

Who won the Vice Presidential Debate? Without a doubt, Pence, he was fluid and prepared for every and all questions asked. Pence stayed grounded in his policies throughout the debate and defending his running mate tremendously. Pence, “would not let Kaine get away with the ridiculous claim that the Iran deal ended that anti-American regime’s nuclear power.” Pence handles questions and attacks better than his running mate, Donald Trump. Does Pence’s professional elegance emphasize how unprofessional Trump is? From a republican point of view Trump looks like he picked the perfect running mate to handle the real business with years of experience. From a Democrat’s point of view, his nonchalant professional attitude emphasizes how crazy Trump is.

Both Pence and Kaine were familiar with policies of their own parties. Kaine was more interested in attacking Trump than answering the questions asked by the moderator. Kaine attacked Trump on issues that Pence could not and would not defend and the audience could tell. When Kaine made these attacks Pence just deflected or did not answer, showing the audience how professional and calm he is. Pence “made a point of highlighting Kaine’s painfully rehearsed lines” which rhetorically harmed Kaine’s potential of winning the debate.

My personal favorite question of the debate: Why voters should trust “Insert Presidential Candidate.” Pence “focused more on opponent Clinton’s shortcomings policy than his candidate’s qualities.” Even Pence has a hard time finding extraordinary qualities Trump posses. Kaine, on the other hand, said because “her strong, lifelong dedication and passion for service.” Pence won overall in this debate but Kaine handled this question better than his opponent.

In this election, the two Presidential candidates are figure heads. It’s all about Trump and Clinton, so does the Vice presidential debate even matter? Does Pence winning this one debate counteract the Presidential debates? Probably not, the Vice Presidential debate is marginal compared to the President’s themselves debating in this election.

 

Sources:

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/10/05/analysis-mike-pence-handily-wins-vice-presidential-debate-n2228206

https://news.vice.com/article/live-coverage-of-the-vice-presidential-debate-between-mike-pence-and-tim-kaine-end