M2 A3 – Political Rhetoric: A Politician’s Tactic

Loufel Grace Cerrada and Marianne Isabelle J. Mariano

Politicians have been known to take advantage of various strategies, integrating the three
categories of ethos in order to get the attention and the heart of the masses. In the case of
Grace Poe’s speech, she was able to construct aspirational futures in a way that the country’s
sentiments were projected into an undetermined future. Examples of such were that, she was
able to mention that children from public schools can have free food and can finish their
studies as well as farmers having free irrigation system. This enabled the audience to think
about the possible futures of the Philippines- that maybe our dreams for the betterment of
this country can turn into reality. Poe also made sure that she was a part of the community
by using pronouns such as tayo, atin, natin and mga kababayan. Portraying an image where
she is a part of the masses made the people think that she is aware of what is happening
around us and therefor understands the effects of it in our daily lives. Poe’s statement, “isang
bansa kung saan lahat ay sama sama, puti ka man, pula, dilaw o kung anumang kulay” was a
good example of avoiding sides. This would’ve –----explain how or like effect of saying this
line to the audience. Number 2 point!!! Explicit appeals (mother siya, mamayan rin siya,
therefore…) Then short answer to which strategies will have worked or well employed (feel
ko and aspiration identity especially since damo issues ang country) 3, feel ko oo, for someone
who wants change, ma move ka gid sa iya speech. Will send u my reference later loufff. Hehe
thanks

NOTES DURING CLASS (feel free to use for your part hehe)
Condor’s Political Rhetoric
1. taking and avoiding sides
2. explicit appeals to common in group membership
3. constructing aspirational identities
4. displays of a rhetorical alignment

TAKING AND AVOIDING SIDES

-politicians claim to side with one group in order to positively appeal to that group
- often in the interest of politicians to “appeal to as many sectors of their universal
audience as possible”
-“polemical not”: strategy used by a speaker to present oneself as beyond the current
factions or divisions

APPEALS TO COMMON IN GROUP MEMBERSHIP

-when politicians group a diverse audience into a single “rhetorical entity” thus turning
them into “entrepreneurs of identity”

Effective political leadership requires:

1. regrouping diverse groups into a single overarching category
2. framing political aspirations as able to fulfill the needs of the category
3. present oneself as the prototypical in group member

ASPIRATIONAL IDENTITIES
 -when politicians, unable to coalesce diverse groups, turn to constructing future
identities where everyone is more empowered and privileged
-Rogers (2012) opines that this strategy may have particular purchase if used to
advocate for an oppressed and/or marginalized group
- Imagine world where……. example (sentiments for the future…)

IMPLICIT DISPLAYS OF RHETORICAL ALIGNMENT

-politicians use implicit verbal and/or nonverbal cues to project their political
alignment
-explicit identity avowals (verbal acts of self description) and implicit identity displays
(public performance of an identity)
-use of “we, our, tayo”

GRACE POE
- kababayan, pathos, matitiis mo ba (magsasaka…) tayo ay pilipino
- ang mga babae … pasensyosa, mapagtimpi.. di sumusuko …..
- ang problema natin ay hindi bago, new perspective, bagong …. bagong pag-asa
-bata free food (aspirational identities)
“natin ang corruption”
ginagawa ko ito para sa inyo, sa kinabukasan na maipagmamalaki natin, sa isang bansa ang
ki, banse kung saan lahat tayo ang samasama, puti ka man dilaw …., pilipinong nagmamahal
sa isang bansa
v tayo, atin, natin,
Write a 250-300 word blog post answering the following questions about the video:

1. How did the speaker exhibit each of the following?

-Taking and avoiding sides
- Explicit appeals to common in-group membership
- Constructing aspirational identities
- Implicit displays of rhetorical alignment
2. Which of these strategies do you think was well employed? Why do you think so?
3. Overall, would you say that the speech was enough to persuade you? Why or why not?