A Rhetorical Analysis of the State of the Union Response

On Tuesday February 5, 2019, President Donald Trump delivered the second longest State of the Union Address to the United States Congress composed of the House of Representatives and the Senate. Every year, the address takes place and streams across America to report the status of the country. Within the speech, the President highlights successes as well as motions towards the current and prominent issues facing the nation. Throughout this specific address to the country, President Trump focused on positive statistics, gave constructive viewpoints on immigration, the economy, national security and health. The traditional Democratic Response follows the lengthy address given by a prominent democrat. The Democratic Party chose Stacey Abrams, a former House Democrat and 2018 Georgia governor Candidate to respond to the President’s address this year. In Abrams’ address she incorporated different rhetorical skills and techniques such as pathos and ethos and used capturing diction to thoroughly share her message.

With a large and diverse group of people behind her, Abrams began her response with a simple greeting that included a mention of the Chinese New Year celebrated on that day. Her swift, but significant, reference portrayed a cultural knowledge and respect she possessed for not only this country, but the diverse group of citizens within it, as well as her respect for other countries and their celebrations. Also, in her introduction, she used the word “conversation” to allude to her continuation of the State of the Union Address presented by President Trump. She used a neutralized word that could almost be seen as unbiased or a safe word to use. Abrams jumps right in and moved into her much shorter response with a personal narrative that not only provides a sense of pathos to the audience, but it also established logos because she has experienced it personally. The narrative revolved around her lower middle class and working-class family during her childhood and how her parents instilled values in her “even when they came home weary and bone tired” (Abrams 2019). She used familial foundational rhetoric alluding to these values her parents taught her like “faith, service, volunteering, education, and responsibility” (2019). Abrams’ use of these certain words evokes a sense of relatability to the audience and certain citizens who share similar values or the working-class status. The polished and elegant language also established pathos in her response.

Next, she continues with the personal narrative of a specific story of her father walking the long stretch home from work in the rain without a jacket. She uses alliteration to discuss her father “soaked and shivering in his shirt sleeves” furthering her pathos establishment with lavish language (2019). Abrams explains that her family climbed in the car and went to find her cold and wet father together. This story not only establishes pathos in the audience, but it ends with her father admitting he gave away his jacket to a homeless man because he knew his family would come for him (2019). This story is a parallel to one of Jesus’ teachings in the Bible. In the book of Matthew, Jesus gives the Sermon on the Mount. In one of the lessons, he tells his listeners that “if anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also. And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. Give him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you do not turn away” (Matt. 5:40-42 New King James Version). This furthers her value of faith by providing application of the value in her life and purpose.

The theme of her speech encompasses Abrams’ father’s heartwarming statement that his family would come for him and can be applied to the state of America and its citizens. She moves on to explain that like the homeless man in the narrative, Americans will not succeed alone. Abrams empowers her audience with the statement that “we live in a nation where opportunity is possible,” but citizens need to come together in order to succeed (Abrams 2019). Her polished language in discussing the convergence of American citizens for success enhances her speech thoroughly, and she continues on and uses certain pronouns like “we”, “us”, and “our”. This communal diction evokes pathos in her audience once again through a common identity of an American community of citizens. Then Abrams lists her multiple vocations like “an attorney, small-business owner, a writer, and the democratic nominee for governor of Georgia” (2019). These professions are simply attainable and relatable to the common American citizen, and because of these reasons, it supplements Abrams’ response. Then she links these professions and her purpose with her father’s statement and encompasses all Americans in the act of coming together for a better and more successful nation.

Abrams focuses on another more personal narrative in her speech revolving around those familial values like volunteering she aforementioned in the response. She volunteered to give food to affected workers and mentioned the unjust act of using these people’s lives as a “stunt, engineered by the president of the United States, one that defied every tenant of fairness and abandoned not just our people, but out values” (2019). Abrams swiftly stated this specific narrative and clearly directed it towards the recent lengthy government shutdown. President Trump did not mention the government shutdown in his State of Union Address, so Abrams’ reason for mentioning the shutdown is evident because of her blatant blame on Trump. She commented this to add to her theme revolving around basic values and sense of American community because obviously the shutdown was not an example of these ideals or collective nature Abrams is advocating for. Abrams states multiple scenarios of disagreement between various constituents and how they did not simply shut down, but they communed and faced the problem directly.

Moreover, she targets and exposes the flaws in the current government administrations, and then she moves on to focus on other issues facing the nation, similar to President Trump’s address to the union. She touches on gun safety issues and educational loans, which Trump did not directly mention. Then she switches to economic issues. Alternately, Trump constructed his address with these monetary facts. Abrams uses targeted diction like “worse harm”, “protect”, and “the Republican tax bill rigged the system” to highlight on the pressing economic issues and explains the labor issues like layoffs and wage decreases (2019). However, certain fact checking sites such as USA Today explains that “it is true that some manufacturing companies in the U.S., such as General Motors, have recently announced plant closures and employee layoffs”, but the employment and manufacturing employment statistics have actually been up since Trump has taken office (Gore 2019). Also, the website mentions that all private-sector workers’ earnings increased by 2.6 percent compared to the past year increase of 1.7 percent since before the administration switch. The confirmation of these incorrect facts presented by Abrams shows the ease of manipulation of statistics in certain political speeches and addresses.

Some of Trump’s positive statistics were also exposed as incorrect or misconstrued by other fact checking sites like National Public Radio. In his address he stated that, “wages are rising at the fastest pace in decades and growing for blue collar workers”; however, NPR revealed that this fact is false (Kurtzleben 2019). They explain that wages have increased, similar to findings of the USA Today results, but NPR exposes that this increase is not the highest rate in decades. President Trump only noted positive and constructive statistics in the beginning of his address without mentioning negative changes that occurred since he has taken office, and Stacey Abrams blamed issues on the Republican party’s decisions. Both of these examples highlight the corrupt and persuading tactics that so many politicians utilize during their addresses to the American people to shape their argument in a certain constructive manner.

Abrams moves onto immigration: a reoccurring American issue that many, if not all, politicians face every day. She continues to issue pathos throughout her speech, and this time she established pathos through polished language and emotional language involving the families affected by immigration issues. Abrams even mentions past compassionate presidents who truly cared about the border disputes. She explains that President Reagan and President Obama understood compassionate border actions, not disputes (Abrams 2019). Similar to Trump’s address, Abrams steps towards health. She details her father’s battle with cancer and her financial involvement. Her brief narrative establishes pathos, but it also issues ethos or credibility when she mentions a result of debt. This, once again, communalizes her with the American people. Her attempts tie her together with the millions of patients of America who sink into debt with every prescription or doctor visit.

After communicating her values in the healthcare area, she transitions to elections and voting rights. Abrams focuses on voter suppression issues first. She has firsthand experience with this pressing and reoccurring concern after the 2018 Governor election in Georgia. The Washington Post explains that Georgia Governor Brian Kemp “pursued stricter voter registration and identification policies… to safeguard against voter fraud, even there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud in the United States” (Williams 2018). Abrams and her PAC Fair Fight Action filed a law suit against the actions of Kemp and other voter suppressors. In her address, she mentions her organization created to cease the unjust act of voter suppression and promote voter rights. In this specific point, Abrams uses the collective pronouns again to highlight the potential communal voting opportunities that Americans possess. She finishes this point with a clever statement concerning aspirations and strides towards an America “where voters pick their leaders, not where politicians pick their voters” (Abrams 2019).

Next, she closes her speech with the actions and changes America has foregone. She mentions overcoming Jim Crow with the Civil and Voting Rights Act, reproductive rights through Roe v Wade (410 U.S. 113), and the legalization of gay marriage. However, she also mentions the issues that the United States ignores despite these revolutionary changes. Abrams discusses the reoccurring issues of unjust racism, sexual assault and violence, and LGBTQ discrimination (Abrams 2019). Through this ending point in her address, Abrams portrays the radical advancements of America, but she also highlights the aspirations and ideal goals of this nation. She continues the communal language and diction to connect her audience and viewers across America with her message. Her concluding statement was directed towards the President. She addressed the fact that Trump’s mistakes are without warrant, and she calls him to continue to adhere to his responsibility, a familial value, to be truthful towards the American people. However, she mentions another unbiased or neutral comment when she admits she does not wish him failure, despite her disappointment. This aids in her establishment of pathos and ethos throughout her speech. Her comment evokes a sense of peace in her audience, showing that morality and ethics remain an integral part of political duties. Her theme of community values shines through this response, and she finishes with a uniting remark that America’s shared values unlock the door to success and through this, Americans will see that “the state of our union will always be strong” (2019).

In summation, Stacey Abrams issued strong senses of ethos and pathos through her response through polished language, emotional and relatable narratives, and communal language. Despite Abrams’ few economical fact mistakes, she delivers a thorough argument for the state of the nation and the importance of community and common values. With the establishment of the foundational familial values and teachings at the beginning of the response, she built a strong base for the stating of various issues facing the nation and the inclusion of these values in the solving of these problems. Compared to Trump’s State of the Union, the short and concise Democratic Response addressed unspoken issues like the government shutdown, voter suppression, sexual assault and violence, and discrimination based on race and sexuality. To solve these issues and other ignored issues by the current government administration, Abrams applies these familial-based values encompassed around faith, volunteering, education, service, and responsibility that her parents instilled in her. She creates an institution composed of these values and a sense of community and relatability, surrounded by polished and emotional rhetoric and delivers this message in her Democratic Response to the American people.

Works Cited

Abrams, Stacey. 2019. “Full Transcript: Stacey Abrams Democratic Rebuttal.” Politics.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/05/us/politics/stacey-abrams-speech.html (February 25, 2019).

Gore, D’Angelo. 2019. “Fact check: Stacey Abrams’ response to Trump’s State of the Union

speech.” News. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/02/06/fact-check-stacey-abrams-response-state-union-speech/2791251002/ (February 25, 2019).

Kurtzleben, Danielle. 2019. “Fact Check: Trump’s State of The Union Address.” Fact Check.

https://www.npr.org/2019/02/05/690345256/fact-check-trumps-state-of-the-union-address (February 25, 2019).

Roe v. Wade. 1973. 410 U.S. 113.

Williams, Vanessa. 2018. “Lawsuit by Abrams PAC continues debate over voter suppression in

bitter Georgia governor’s race.” The Wall Street Journal: Politics.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/lawsuit-alleges-voter-suppression-in-bitter-georgia-governors-race-and-seeks-protections-for-future-races (February 25, 2019).