Do the same thing this week as you did last week, only this week we're looking at candidate answers to the question on Climate Change.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/12/11/eveningnews/main3605907.shtml?source=search_story
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Is there a reason why no one posted this week?
The candidates all made the rhetorical choice to say exactly what they needed to have supporters. They all said that it was very important and all talked about ways to make America better because blah, blah, blah.
I agree with Mike Huckabee because he said he "honestly didn't know." And I don't either.
Sorry it's late. Half credit?
Joe Biden seemed like he wanted to scare people into his ideas. Huckabee liked to use repetition with "ought to." Many of the candidates used dates as deadlines or hopeful deadlines. They were also comparing us to other countries and wanting us to be better than them (mostly China and India.) Most if not all, the can didates used logical appeals by saying that America needs to change it's ways or else.
Aggy: what you're doing is the logical fallacy of "appeal to ignorance." It's one thing to not care, but to not know, and base judgements on that goes against to root and core of democratic princples.
Raven, more than repetition, "ought to" is a rhetorical choice in diction. How is he trying to establish himself as a speaker, through the choice and repetition of those words? Who is his audience? How does "ought to" affect his message?
Post a Comment