It occurred to me today, that while I felt as if I had a fairly good idea of what Hilary Clinton’s stance on National Security is, I had never actually taken the time to look at her official campaign webpage to specifically learn about her views in her own words. Immediately, I decided to do some research. I found that the very first sentence on Hilary’s National Security page reads, “With policies that keep us strong and safe, America will lead the world in the 21st century.” In such few words, Hilary has used entire textbooks worth of knowledge on rhetorical strategy. Particularly, she has stated an argument, framed the issue, and made multiple assumptions within her statement.
What is the Argument?
The Argument that is made through her statement is this: By choosing Hilary, we will have a strong and safe country and America will be a world leader in the 21st century. The argument continues to emphasize the overarching argument of the campaign: that Hilary should be the next President. Therefore, though it is never directly stated, the audience clearly reads “Vote for Hilary” between the lines of the message.
How has the argument been framed?
The art of framing an argument has been skillfully included in Hilary’s statement. She has framed the argument to infer that it is HER policies that will make America strong and safe, and the new world leader. This is never directly stated, but it is a clever underlying rhetorical ploy. The reader can’t help but assume that it is Hilary Clinton’s National Security stances on terrorism and the like that will save the future of America.
What are the Assumptions?
There are a few key assumptions that Clinton makes in her opening statement on National Security. First, she assumes that everybody wants to live in a strong and safe country. Second, she assumes that everybody wants America to be a world leader in the 21st century. She is able to assume these things because strength, safety, and strong leadership are all a part of the American ideal, but in turn, she is assuming that everyone embodies the same American ideal that she does.
The Battle Cry
And then it hit me. Policy is not the primary fighter against terrorism. It is the Rhetoric behind the policy that is the true battle cry.
This is a very thoughtful analysis, and I like that you were able to rightfully extract so much rhetorical value from even that one sentence. This is definitely typical rhetorical strategy, as she is able to very particularly frame the issue and also make some key arguments succinctly and effectively. Through even this one sentence, she exhibits the leadership qualities of presidents which we discussed in class: strong, capable, hopeful, and dynamic. This same strategy is evident throughout her website, including her page on Combating Terrorism (www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/combating-terrorism/).