Twitter Tirades, Kasich Kindness and Revolution Rhetoric: The State of the Race 2016

By THOMAS HARTWELL

The 2016 presidential campaign has been underway for months, and various candidates have utilized various communication outlets and tactics to ensure voters that they are the best candidate for office. There are three themes that, over the entirety of the 2016 campaign season, have stuck out to me. These three themes and the candidates behind them have impressed me (whether or not I care to endorse them).

#1 Trump Twitter Tirades

From Donald Trump Twitter

Donald Trump has always made "good" use of his twitter, promoting his "enthralling" personal thoughts and spotlighting his "razor-sharp insight" into politics, but this campaign season, he has outdone himself. There is something to be said for the impact of "Twitter storms." Consumers go on them constantly and are immediately contacted by the organizations they drag through the mud, offering steals and deals to try to make amends and stifle public, negative publicity. Trump has used his Twitter storms and account as both an entertainment outlet and a tool for his campaign. His attacks on other candidates, the media and his bolstering of his own accomplishments have drawn attention and even headlines. As we have discussed in a course which revolves around political communication, a candidate must be able to attract attention and spark discussion on social media, as well as in traditional media. Trump has done just that both with his "shocker statements" in person, recapturing some of that spotlight, but also with Twitter storms taking the wind out of less entertaining candidates' sails.

From Donald Trump Twitter

Potential downfall: In a general election against Hillary, how will Trump's Twitter foot stamping and name calling fair against Hillary's ability to get into the nitty-gritty on the issues?

#2 The Revolution Rhetoric: Bernie Sanders

How many time have we heard Bernie Sanders say the words "political revolution" and "top one percent" in his speeches, at debates, in interviews, and at rallies? While some see Sanders' focus on the issue he is most passionate about -- corporate greed, fixing income inequality, changing a corrupt campaign finance system, etc. -- as a weakness, calling him a one-issue candidate, his supporters see it as more of a brand. Sanders' brand through his rhetoric, whether critics will admit it or not, have propelled him to where he is now. Sanders, a self-proclaimed Democratic Socialist was expected to be laughed out of this primary election (much like another presidential candidate this season). Through a radical, revolutionary brand in his rhetoric, and the help of many, many Millennials in voting and spreading the word, Sanders has rocketed to several neck-and-neck state primaries with Hillary Clinton. His rhetorical brand of a government "truly for the people" has connected with many voters' anger with Washington and corporate America's greed (again, does this remind you of another candidate?). It cannot be denied that Bernie's brand is catching wind either -- even Hillary Clinton began borrowing some of his lines recently. Might Hillary be considering Bernie's brand, and might she be considering a Bernie VP to better her own stance in the eyes of Democratic Independents? We'll have to see.

Potential downfall: While his rhetoric is exciting, many see him as a one-issue candidate and his young voter following, while excited about him, doesn't turn out to polls in quite the number his campaign might hope.

#3 Kasich's Kindness

John Kasich has time and time again refused to "go negative" against other presidential candidates. Many feel that it is this choice that has doomed Kasich's campaign to fail from the beginning, but I'm not so sure. Kasich has taken the opposite approach of a Trump or, most recently, a Rubio this campaign season, attempting to show through his actions, not fighting words, that he is the candidate that can "get stuff done." As the race progressed, it became more and more obvious that Kasich wasn't a frontrunner, and, while he survived into the top four, he wasn't destined to be the next president, so why remain gentle, kind, patient Kasich? Kasich, too, is promoting a brand, but not with rhetoric; his is with non-verbal cues, actions, and choices. Kasich maintains a brand, still, of selling his product instead of commenting on why the others' are inferior. There have been inklings, however, that Kasich's brand is strategic. If Kasich does not take opportunities to attack candidates, even if the opportunity is handed to him, he remains a friend and is has been suggested that this may be his ploy for VP. The Ohio governor may be using his political communication skills as a sort of Jedi mind trick on voters, and instead, he may be focusing his energy on the frontrunners' right-hand seat.

Potential downfalls: Kasich continues to pull delegates away from the frontrunners and runs the risk of contributing to a Republican convention in which his VP dreams are slightly more cloudy.

Twitter, tough talk and (sorry) Trump again

As there is an abundance of attention on Trump and his various campaigning techniques, I wanted to avoid talking about him for a while -- I was going to talk Clinton this time. In light of his recent "Fox debate boycott," however, I cannot ignore -- for the purpose of discussing the mobilization of followers -- his decision. 

Sorry Hillary, you'll have to wait.

Picture from humanevents.com

Trump does two things very well: Make waves and -- for lack of a better term -- sling poo. He does these two things well in two ways: Tweets and speeches.

Using his debate boycott as an example, let's discuss the "make waves" and "speech" points. Trump has, no doubt, been quite a ratings booster for many news media outlets. He has made statements that have been made into headlines, made claims that have sparked impassioned debates and, for some, boosted debates' entertainment value. His lack of political correctness has appealed to the masses, who feel that Americans have become "soft" and who want to hear that extreme change will come about, right now. Trump gives his followers these extreme statements and gives them a call to action, which his slogan, "Make America Great Again" embodies. His latest call to action was sparked by his refusal to participate in Thursday's Fox debate over long-standing disagreements with network officials. He challenged after announcing his absence, "Let's see how the ratings do."

Many Trump supporters have taken this call to action to heart and are boycotting the debate themselves. Trump has doubled-down on his call by announcing the creation of a fundraiser for veterans and the Wounded Warrior Project to be put on during the debate -- Trump's goal seems to be to pull more attention away from Fox. Such seemingly irrational moves on a candidate's part have been consistently benefiting Trump, proving that he has created a high-spirited, highly impressionable and highly mobilized follower base.

In Joseph Tuman's, "Political Communication in American Campaigns," Tuman suggests, "[Speech] effectiveness will depend on the audience; we are not all affected by ethos, pathos, and logos in the same ways." Tuman also suggests that a speaker/candidate has to know his/her audience -- something that leaves a bad taste in my mouth to have to admit, Trump does well.

In the case of "slinging poo" on Twitter -- well, see for yourself. Trump, as I have mentioned before, does well to make himself more desirable by making other candidates less desirable. The content of his tweets are not the only part of his Twitter usage that has, thus far, benefited him. The amount of tweets that Trump puts out daily, praising himself, attacking others and relaying plans is stifling compared to the other candidates' pages. Typically, the candidate with the most coverage will receive the most support. 

So, a recap: Trump captures media coverage for free by making outrageous claims and statements, puts doubt in voters minds as to the reliability and ability of other candidates and mobilizes his followers with calls to action.

While Trump may have benefited immensely from his wild claims in the campaign season, I have to believe that voters will come to the conclusion that the same candidate who so skillfully "slings poo" at other candidates may not be the best choice to win the whole thing. 

So Mr. Trump, my advice to you is this: Unless you can handle quite a bit of global backlash, maybe you should quit while you're ahead -- some foreign leaders may not be so afraid to sling more than just "poo" back.