1. What are the positive and negatives of calling out the "Washington Establishment" in his first speech as President?
2. The President's speech is reflected on the new edition of the White House Home page:
White House Issues Page
Which portions of the speech appealed to his constituency?
Which portions of the speech do you think most appealed to independent voters?
Which portions of the speech appealed to opposition voters?
3.The below link is from a liberal website VOX, but the video itself was produced prior to the address and offers a fairly good checklist on what makes for an effective speech.
An Historical Analysis of previous Inaugural Addresses
Based on this video, did President Trump give a good speech? Do you believe he gave a good speech?
1. Donald Trump called out the "Washington Establishment" in his first speech as president. There were several positives to doing this; for example this allows him to try and convince the people that he will keep his intended promises to the nation. It allows him to connect to those who feel as if the government hasn't kept them within their best interest, as well as promising change for those who feel that change hasn't happened in years. However, by calling out the Washington Establishment, Trump is also negatively affecting his speech. By doing this, he is already creating tension within government, reprimanding those who were in support of Obama and past presidents, due to him speaking negatively of the change that former presidents have brought forth. He further divided the parties by demoting change that has been brought forth by the democratic party, acting as though all efforts of the Obama administration were unsuccessful. Overall, calling out the Washington Administration both positively and negatively affected the message of Trump's first presidential speech.
ReplyDelete2.Portion's of Trump's speech appealed to his constituent, independent, and oppositional voters. Trump's promises to stop funding foreign military affairs, give jobs back to American citizens, and to stand up for law enforcement are all in favor of constituent voters. His promises to improve infrastructure and create jobs (getting people off of welfare), remove ISIS and any additional forms of terrorism, and reform education are in favor of his independent voters. His promises to eradicate prejudice, and uplift the middle class and economy are in favor of his oppositional voters. Overall, Trump's speech did offer positives to all voters in the election.
3. Based on the video, Trump did not give a good speech. He missed almost all points made within the video on what makes a speech effective. He did not unify the country through his words, and left America's people divided. He did not speak of principle so much as he spoke of policy; listing specific ideas rather than general statements about his future presidency. He did not mention that nobody is above the law, which may take away some sense of security for the nation's trust in checks and balances. Lastly, Trump did not put his campaign behind him. He made it about himself more-so than the people; only uniting the country with the end of his speech by saying "we." His speech was not inspirational, and did not encourage the country to work together for the greater good.
I personally agree with the video's point of view, and believe that Trump's speech was in no way effective. It sounded like a campaign speech, rather than his first speech as our president. He spent time implying the ineffectiveness of the Obama administration by continually saying that change will "finally" ensue under his new administration. However, his first speech should not be spent talking about the effectiveness/ineffectiveness of former presidencies, but instead on uniting the country and giving oppositional voters faith that he can do his job and protect our country. He did no such thing, and made no efforts to unite the people. He offered no inspiration to anyone but his supporters, which may have further divided the country and deepened the fear of those whom his plans may negatively effect. Overall, Trump's speech was in no way as effective as it should have been after such a controversial election, and I believe that he must make more of an effort to unite the country that the election has so deeply divided. (Erin Ryan)
Unfortunately, I am going to have to disagree with you as much as I dislike the new president. I heard many more instances of inclusive language in Trump’s speech. He certainly talked about unity as in having citizens join together to determine the course of America. He mentioned that American citizens are living under the same sky, bleeding the same blood of patriots, and pledging loyalty to the same flag. Furthermore, I heard more about principles such as “America First” and “Buy American, Hire American” than any specific policy. Additionally, his composure very much indicates that his campaign is behind him. Previously, he had always gone off of the handle by talking about imprisoning Hillary Clinton and more. Today, I did not see that Trump, and hopefully we never witness that Trump again. Despite our disagreements on what we heard and saw, we can agree that this speech did not inspire either of us to look forward to the future. (NICHOLAS GUCCIARDO)
DeleteI agree with all of your points. Trump's speech did not in any way lessen the divide between people of different races and religions that he has definitely played a hand in creating. Despite the fact that this seems to be the most inclusive speech Trump has ever made, it was not enough to ease people's concerns about the kind of president Trump will be.
DeleteKevin Gaunay
ReplyDelete1. There are many positives and negatives to President Trump's first speech in which he called out the Washington establishment. A positive in doing this is reminding the people why they voted for him; he is a business man and not a politician, and many people voted for him because they wanted change in Washington, so talking about it gives the people hope that he will change it. While this may give hope to some people, there are still negatives to his speech, for instance he is calling out all of the politicians that he will have to work with and compromise with. By insulting all of them, they may be less likely be willing to work willingly with him and promote what he supports. Also, he is disagreeing with all of the past presidents' actions and changes, especially Obama's changes such as the Affordable Care Act, therefore supporters of those past presidents may be less supportive of him.
2. President Trump's speech did not only speak to his supporters; it spoke to all constituent, independent, and opposition voters. He always says he wants to put America first, and his speech represents this when he says he promises to stop funding foreign military affairs and bring many more jobs to Americans and take them back from overseas. Other promises he makes include defeating ISIS, which everyone can support, improve American infrastructure, and improve the overall economy for all Americans.
3. Trump did not give a good speech at his inaugural address. Instead of attempting to unite the democrats and republicans who are more divided right now than ever, he merely listed ideas he had and didn't relieve any tensions the people had. He tried to make himself look great and act like he deserved the popular vote too, even though he only won because of the electoral college. I agree with the video in that Trump's speech was not effective at all. Most inaugural addresses bring hope to the people and deliver a strong message, and when looked at in the future one can see inspiring quotes. I did not see that with Trump's speech, but maybe someone will see that in the future.
I’m in agreement with your first two points. Like Erin Ryan’s response, however, I disagree with your third point. I saw a legitimate attempt to unite everyone under the new national effort to restore America. He mentioned that regardless of the political differences, we all lived under the same sky, bleed the same blood of patriotism, and pledge allegiance to the same flag. You also mentioned that Trump did not deliver a strong message. On the contrary, his message of putting America first clearly resonated throughout his speech. He talked about principles such as “Buy American, Hire American” which was one of his memorable lines from that speech. Despite our differences on the third point, it is clear that neither of us were personally inspired by his speech. (NICHOLAS GUCCIARDO)
DeleteI agree with all three points you have argued. His lack of positivity and hope for both constituent and oppositional voters is what left the country divided. His only use of "inspiration" regarded only those who were in favor of him, leaving those opposed in the dark. He did not offer reassurance of equality to those who voted against him in fear of losing their rights, and I believe that that is what it would have taken to truly unite US citizens.
DeleteI agree with all three points. His speech does not give me hope for the future and did not unite the country. He did a good job of including something in his speech to appeal to all Americans, regardless of their political stance. In calling out the "Washington Establishment" Trump appealed to his supporters, but make enemies withing Washington.
DeleteI agree that Trump's speech appealed to all Americans, constituent, opposition, or independent voters. He did a good job in unifying the country and appealing to all types of voters. He appealed some parts to constituents, some to independents, and some to the opposition. This will help him in his effort to unify the country.
DeleteCalling out the establishment in Washington D.C. can help his image with the constituency but it can also come back to haunt him later if the establishment fights Trump. On the positive, his verbal assault on the establishment is what supporters have wanted to hear for ages. These supporters have supposedly been forgotten and they want to release their anger on the establishment. Trump’s remarks regarding the establishment energizes his advocates, which will ensure strong support once he starts his work as president. On the contrary, his remarks may or may not get him into trouble with an establishment-heavy Congress that he will have to cooperate with. Even though his party dominates Congress, offended members of both parties will get their retribution in some way if his speech offends them.
ReplyDeleteI would argue that Trump’s entire speech appealed to his constituency. For a prolonged period of time, his supporters have felt forgotten. Everything that Trump says is what these voters have searching for and they most likely danced to every last word of his speech. Independent voters who are embarrassed at the severe divide of this country can feel assured that Trump’s plea for unity will heal some divide. Independent voters may also find relief in the calmer tone of Trump’s speech as a sign of a more composed president than their fears had originally led them to believe. Opposition voters may have felt slightly less upset when he mentioned lifting people out of poverty, but I’m almost certain that opposition voters did not feel better as the scars of Trump’s previous speeches remain etched into their souls.
Effective Speech Checklist:
Unify the Country: From the beginning of his speech, he made sure that this speech was directed to every American citizen. He mentioned that everyone has the same blood of patriots. One person in Detroit lived under the same sky as someone living the fields of Nebraska. Everyone, regardless of their political affiliation, pledges to the same stars and stripes. His repeated pleas for unity were more necessary than ever, as this follows the most heated election of all-time.
Share PRINCIPLE, Not Policy: This is one area where he surprised me. I anticipated that he would try to emphasize specific policies that he promised. However, he kept it to the principles of “America First”, “Buy American, Hire American,” and “Make America Great Again.” He made all of those very clear with the intention of restoring glory to the American people once again.
Affirm Limitations: This area is where Donald Trump fails spectacularly and alarms me. He does mention that Washington will face limits from him. However, there is nothing that tells me about his own limitations. He said nothing about keeping his own potential abuse of power in check, which may raise some red flags for this administration.
Keep it Short: Donald Trump’s speech runs approximately nineteen minutes long. For his supporters, this feels like the perfect length. The length was sufficient to get his points in, but short and compact enough to keep the audience and myself engaged.
NO Campaign: Thankfully, he was virtually nothing like the Trump we saw on the campaign trail. Rather than tearing opponents apart, he appealed to unifying the nation together. Additionally, there was no mention of putting Hillary Clinton in prison, another key part of the campaign. Policies such as the wall were mentioned constantly on the campaign. This made me feel somewhat more at ease with not by much.
We, not I: Trump was very careful to use the word, “we,” and “our” while speaking. One American’s dream was “our dream” and this instance of word usage was repeated, adding to the effectiveness of the speech. His use of the collective possessive pronouns would make anyone feel that they are in this struggle with the rest of the nation. (NICHOLAS GUCCIARDO)
I agree with your first two points. Calling out the Washington Establishment appeals to his supporters and will help him gain popularity within that group, but his remarks will increase tensions in Washington. I also agree that Trump appealed to all Americans to some degree. Your point about appealing to independent voters by promising to unite the country is something I hadn't though of, but you make a good point. I do not agree with your view of Trump's speech. I did not see a sense of unity in his speech, and I feel that he focused on principle more than policy. While Trump was calmer than he was during the campaign, his speech still felt like a campaign pitch.
DeleteI agree completely with your analysis of President Trump's failure to mention the limitations of power, but I do think that there may be a strategy behind it. Many people, especially those of minority groups, feel powerless because of him as president. Ignoring the limitations of power, though irrational, may be a tactic to inspire people to support his vision.
DeleteSimply addressing the nation as a whole does not unify the nation. He fails in that point on the checklist if what you have said is what makes that point on the checklist fulfilled. His speech would have been very nice if the nation as a whole were behind him. However, they are not, and he is living in a fantasy land where talking to the nation as a whole will make us all united. With all of the conflicting protests going on, if he were to reference them and explain how he would try his best to unify the nation, it would be much better for him. The nation cannot be truly together when the man giving the speech is known to be sexist, racist, and hasn't had less than a million dollars for a second in his life.
DeleteI agree with the point you have made about Trump doing more to unite the country than I was able to recognize. He did use more united words, and tried to bring everybody together. However in my opinion he was somewhat unsuccessful doing so because he offered little to no hope for oppositional voters. I believe that in order to bring the same level of hope to oppositional and independent voters, as well as constituent voters, he needed to deliver a more inspiring speech, and reassure that US citizens are protected under the constitution and remain entitled to their rights. Overall his effort to unite the country was shown; I just believe that in order to heal the divide of this particular election, a greater effort was needed.
ReplyDelete1. Donald Trump calls out the establishment many times in his speech which will both aid him, and hurt him. The bright side to calling the government out, is the massive support that the people put behind him for it. Many progressive Americans who are tired of the way things have been going look to him as an idol, someone who can make the country better for the people. Throughout his speech he emphasizes how he is going to put the government back in the hands of the people. However, calling out the government is going to cause more problems with congress. By calling out the establishment in the way he did he effectively called all existing members of congress selfish, while the job of a politician is to make the public happy. This criticism could lead to potential gridlock in the future of Trump's presidency.
ReplyDelete2. Although I am personally not a fan of President Trump, the speech he delivered could have effectively touched any American. Trump appealed to his supports by speaking of how he is going to change everything and make America great again. He spoke of how he was going to create more jobs, protect our neighborhoods, and better our education and this is exactly what the progressive supports want to hear. He appealed to them by calling out the faults in the existing government and saying that he will fix it all. He appealed to the independents with his idea of giving the government back to the people. He specifically said that no person will be ignored, which will gain many independent supporters approval because their ideas are generally unheard due to their low popularity with the people. Trump appealed to those opposed to him in the same way and he also mentioned many times that our nation is strongest when we work together. Trump hammered the ideal that America as a whole is very strong and the two parties must come together and work as one.
3. According to the video Donald Trump's speech is a good one. He covers all three of the topics of the video, uniting the country, speaking of principle and not policy, and affirming limitations.He also manages to keep his speech relatively short and covers the areas that are most important to the people. In my opinion I felt Trump had a good speech, he covered the topics that the people wanted and he tried to unite a country that is largely divided at the time. While the address seems uncharacteristic of him, it was well-made and well-organized.
I agree that his speech was effective. He did a very good job in rallying the split America during the speech. He addressed everyone as America. With that being said he constantly spoke about improving American and putting everyone first. From all the speeches that we've seen from President Trump this election season, I believe this one in particular reaches out to everyone in a way that would inspire everyone to unit after a tough political season.
Delete1) Donald Trump calling out the "Washington Establishment" had both pros and cons. By criticizing the "Washington Establishment" Trump connected to many Americans who felt that the government wasn't on their side. Many of President Trump's supporters feel that the "Washington Establishment" was working for themselves and not for the American people, so in criticizing the establishment Trump was speaking to his core supporters. By calling out those who did not help the people, Trump was saying that he would work for the people and not for himself. He is promising change. However; calling out the "Washington Establishment" also has many cons. President Trump was calling out government officials who he has to work with for the next four years. By saying that Washington wasn't working for the people Trump probably made some enemies in Washington. President Trump also divided the country with this comment. Not all Americans feel that the Washington Establishment is bad, some people believe that Washington has done a lot to help the average American. Starting his presidency by criticizing the people in Washington does not set a positive tone for his presidency.
ReplyDelete2) Trump appealed to his constituency by talking about building up the military, bringing jobs back to America, bringing change to Washington and supporting law enforcement. Many of the thinks that Trump talked about during his campaign appeared in this speech, and would appeal to his supporters. Trump also appealed to independent voters by talking about improving infrastructure, reforming education and eliminating radical Islamic terrorism. President Trump also talked about helping workers, families, etc. through trade and taxes. While I don't think that Trump's speech appealed to opposition voters as a whole, there were aspects of his speech that could be considered appealing. Trump discouraged prejudice saying there is no room for prejudice when we open our hearts to patriotism. "Speak our minds openly, debate our disagreements honestly, but always pursue solidarity." Trump also spoke about improving the economy and helping the middle class.
3) The video explains that a good speech should unite the country, discuss principle, affirm the limits of power, and keep it short. Trump's speech was short, but that's the only thing he did right. Trump did not unite the country in his speech. His rhetoric was not uniting and the message of his speech did nothing to bring this country together. Trump's speech did not focus on principle, instead it seemed like a campaign speech stressing action. There was no mention of the limits of power during President Trump's speech. The video stressed that the President should include something about how nobody is above the law, but Trump didn't include anything like that. Trump's speech did not portray him as the president of all people. He did not inspire listeners, welcome his opponents, or unite the country; three thing that the video said were key in a successful speech.
I agree with the assessment based on the video. I was not inspired by President Trump's speech. I think that Trump focused on the negative too much instead of looking ahead to make things better. Not being a supporter of Trump, most of his speech did not appeal to me. There was no sign of Trump reaching across the isle to opposition voters trying to unite the country.
I agree with you in regards to how calling out the "Washington Establishment" affected Trump's speech, as well as the fact that Trump's speech had factors that appealed to his constituency, independent voters, and his opposition.
DeleteHowever, I disagree with you in regards to whether or not President Trump's speech was good. I believe that it successfully achieved each element of a good speech, according to the video, except for failing to affirm his own limitations. His speech stressed unification of the country, discussed his principles, and explained that he planned to help all of America. While his views are not necessarily in line with many Americans, including myself in many aspects, I believe Trump gave a good speech.
1) Calling out the establishment in his address was really a double edged sword. Yes it does rally the people together as well as instill trust in the voters that he will stick to his word. But at the same time he called out all his now colleges who just so happened to be sitting right in front of him. That's almost like someone landing a new job and as they enter the office for the first time, slapping your colleges coffee out of there hand instead of a "good morning". I would not look forward to working the next four years with that person. It takes a lot of guts to do this and I respect that he stuck to his word for the people.
ReplyDelete2) He stuck the the main points of his campaign, making his purpose for standing up there very clear. Things like securing the borders by building the infamous wall, and making sure companies stay in America, essentially making the country great again. A part that would appeal to an independent voter would be his major spot light on putting America first. Creating more jobs and improving infrastructure is easily appealing to any American. As for the opposition, he speaks about doing away with prejudice notions and up lifting the middle class, something both president Trump and Hilary Clinton's campaign had in-common. He them summed it all up by saying they all need to work together for this country to progress forward. No matter what side a voter is on, the common goal is to move forward.
3) According to the video he didn't give a good speech. Yes it was short and to the point but where he flawed was the close correlation between the campaign trail and the speech. The need to move on one would say.
Id disagree with these statements. Being unconventional is what got him this far. Put yourself in his shoes, why would yo change the one thing that got you to hold this powerful position? Many may not agree with it but when it boils down to it, why fix something that isn't broke?
I disagree in that I believe his speech was good. He did a good job in unifying Americans, regardless of race, religion, or political affiliation. Unifying the country is something important that has to be fixed in the next 4 years in order to really see the country progress again.
DeleteI disagree with your third point. I believe his address to the American people was very uniting. He spoke to the people as a whole stating that we all must work together for a greater America. He spoke about putting the people of America first. Putting our people back to work and putting ourself in foreign affairs is a good cause to rally behind
ReplyDelete1. One positive to calling out the "Washington Establishment" during Trump's first speech is that it set a precedent that congress won't be able to do as little as they have been doing under his watch. It proves a point to the American people that he won't let it happen anymore and he will push congress for change to benefit Americans. One negative to this is that he is calling out congress on his first day in office. This may lead to poor relations with certain congressmen in the future which could possibly lead to future gridlock.
ReplyDelete2. Trump appealed to his constituency by talking about rebuilding the military and repeating his campaign promise to "Make America Great Again". Trump appealed to independent voters by taking a stance on our deteriorating infrastructure and promising to make drastic improvements. Trump then appealed to his opposition by simply stating the fact that at heart, regardless of race or political party, we are all Americans who should unite for the greater good.
3. I believe Trump gave a good first speech. He did a very good job of making an effort to unify the country. He did that by stating the fact that we are all Americans several times. One of his most influential lines of his speech said, "As Americans, we all had the same dreams." I believe he did a good job of uniting the country in his first speech. He also put down principal guidelines for his term as president by firmly stating his goals and takes on issues and how he plans to fix them. Finally, he talked about how he admires the country's ability to peacefully transfer power among people and political parties, which speaks to how our country doesn't have anyone who is above the law. This precedent is something that has to be used in ever inaugural speech in order for it to be good, and I believe he accomplished all three of those key points.
I agree with you in the fact that President Trump's speech was good. I also think he did a great job in trying to unify the country. He had many lines encouraging American unity and stating the importance of patriotism. I think by stating, "as Americans, we all had the same dreams," he is portraying the American dream and saying that despite your background or where you live, everyone in this country shares the desire for success and deserves a chance to pursue it.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1. Calling out the "Washington Establishment" definitely had benefits and hindrances for President Trump. One advantage to calling out the government is that it will hopefully motivate them to make changes, which is what Trump, and his many supporters, are hoping for. He manages to keep his promise to the people that he will cause change. However, there were also some negatives to this. For example, he creates tension with the government by diminishing the work of the presidents before him. President Trump does not do too well in regards to uniting the country either.
ReplyDelete2. Many aspects of Trump's speech appealed to his constituency. Some appealing factors of his speech were discussing border security and keeping companies domestic. He discussed a lot of what his campaign was about which absolutely appealed to his constituency.
Other factors appealed to independent voters such as the promise to improve infrastructure. Education reforms probably appealed to independent voters as well. He also mentioned making sure the people get what they want and that he will give the government back to the people, which is probably appealing to most people.
Most of what Trump said probably did not appeal to the opposition, however a couple of things may have. Some things that may have appealed to them were helping the middle class and improving race relations, which were two major aspects of Hillary Clinton's campaign. Thus, these factors must have been appealing to the opposition.
3. Based on the video, I believe that Trump's speech was effective. I believe that he did manage to use unified language to include the country, as he planned to put America first. While it is difficult for him to seem like he's unifying the country when his beliefs are very far off from some of his oppositions, when I watched his speech, I truly thought that he wanted our country to unite and to eradicate the division that currently exists.
I also believe he stated his principles instead of policies as he discussed the ideas that he wishes to be enforced, such as border security. He stated his goals for the United States and how he plans to reach them.
Trump does not affirm limitations on himself, but he guarantees that the rest of the government will be limited by him. His speech definitely lacked in this aspect as he discussed his plans to use his power, rather than to show he won't abuse it.
Overall, President Trump kept his speech short and to the point. He discussed unification of the country, as well as discussing his plans for the future.
I agree with the video in regards to what makes up a good speech, and I believe, despite a few missteps, President Trump delivered a very good speech.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI agree with you in the fact that Donald Trump tried to use unifying language in order to unite the country. It is difficult for him to seem as if he is trying to unite the country because his ideas and beliefs are so different than the oppositions' beliefs. I do agree that Trump kept his speech short and to the point.
Delete1. When Trump called out the "Washington Establishment" he attempted to connect with his main idea in his presidential campaign, that he is not like the other nominees because he is not a corrupt politician. This point was supposed to show that he will fix the corrupt "Washington Establishment" in his new presidency and that the people will finally get what they deserve. It was supposed to keep him as one of the people. It also hurt is inauguration speech by making it seem too campaign-like and not presidential.
ReplyDelete2. Trump appealed to his constituency when he followed up his presidential campaign. For example, calling out the "Washington Establishment," talking about his plans for immigration, building the military, and speaking about his fight to end violence. He appealed to his independent and opposition voters by speaking about things that everyone wants, for example more jobs, ending violence, and the end of racism and sexism.
3. I personally feel that Trump could have given a better speech, but I think that it was okay. He attempted to heal the nation by, for example, complimenting Obama on a smooth transition of power. I feel like he could have done more to do this. I feel like he made his speech too much about what he already talked about in his campaign speeches, his goals, rather than trying to heal the nation and showing limited power. He also set his standards really high, which, if he fails, will cause turmoil in the nation.
I agree with your analysis of the positive aspects of President Trump's speech and think that, although it was a good speech and sounded presidential, he retained his own voice and his own specific way of phrasing sentences and ideas that helped him to be authentic. I think that he wants to be authentic now and not drastically alter how he will conduct himself as president because then he will truly be without any support in 2020 when he runs for reelection because he had isolated his constituents and proved to undecided and opposition voters that he cannot remain true to his word and intentions.
Delete1. The most obvious positive is that unquestionably Trump’s base supports him because they see him as an outsider, and he appealed to them because he called out the Washington Establishment from the beginning and stated that the Washington Establishment has put itself first, to the detriment of Americans. On the other hand, in order to get anything done, he the needs cooperation of the “Washington Establishment” who are the insiders, both democrats and republicans.
ReplyDelete2. The entirety of President Trump’s speech appealed to his constituency, from his emphasis on increasing jobs, to improving infrastructure and on uniting America. As well, a large portion of Evangelical Christians supported Trump in the general election and his frequent references to the Bible and God definitely appealed to this constituency.
Trump appealed to independents when he stated that “I will fight for you with every breath in my body – and I will never, ever let you down.” And when he stated that “No challenge can match the heart and fight and spirit of America.”
Even if his opposition disagrees with everything Trump stands for, they had to agree with Trump when he stated that “It is time to remember that old wisdom our soldiers will never forget: That whether we are black or brown or white, we all bleed the same red blood of patriots, we all enjoy the same glorious freedoms, and we all salute the same great American Flag. And whether a child is born in the urban sprawl of Detroit or the windswept plains of Nebraska, they look up at the same night sky, they fill their heart with the same dreams and they are infused with the breath of life by the same almighty Creator.” Trump explicitly said that everyone in America is created equally and have the same rights which is something that his opposition is very vocal about.
3. Based on the video, Trump gave a good speech. He kept it short, spoke of uniting the country, and did not make the speech about himself by using the word “we” very frequently in his speech. I believe that President Trump gave a very good speech. It left me feeling hopeful and excited about our country’s future.
I agree with your assessment that Trump calling out the "Washington establishment" is indicative with his supporters appeal for him being an outsider. This was a smart move for Trump because a major reason he was elected was that he came from outside of the Washington establishment. Although this may be what his supporters want to hear, it will certainly strain the relationship he will have with the current insiders in Washington.
Delete1. In President Trump’s Inaugural Address, he made a point of calling out the “Washington Establishment.” There are many positive and negative aspects to making such remarks. First and foremost, he is distinguishing himself from politicians, or the “Washington Establishment,” who have been seen in a negative light by most Americans for being corrupt and acting in self interest. A major campaign promise of President Trump has been to finally drain the swamp in Washington, and including these remarks in his Address signifies his intentions of making good on that promise. Calling out the “Washington Establishment” can also have some negative drawbacks. Now that he is the President, he is going to have to effectively work with the other branches of government, which include the same people he just called out for being a problem for this country. He may have strained the future relationship with members of congress, which could be a problem down the road.
ReplyDelete2. In President Trump’s Inaugural Address, he touched upon key points that may have appealed to his constituents, independents and some points may have even appealed to opposition voters. In regards to his constituents, Trump promised to strengthen the military and bring back American jobs by reestablishing American industry. These have both been key campaign promises for Trump. President Trump may have appealed to independent voters by mentioning his plans to improve the American infrastructure. Finally, some aspects of President Trump’s Address were appealing to opposition voters such as working to defeat ISIS and being the President for every American, while looking out for the interests of every American.
3. Based on the video, President Trump gave a good speech. The video defines a good Inaugural Address as one that unifies the country, shares principles rather than policies and affirms Presidential limitations. In Trump’s speech, he effectively completes all the aspects needed for a good Inaugural Address. Throughout his speech, Trump states that he is the President for all Americans. He says, “We share one heart, one home, and one glorious destiny,” trying to unify all Americans. Also, Trump shares principles rather than policy as he asserts his goals to bring American jobs back and stop allowing America to falter as other countries prosper. Finally, Trump affirms Presidential limitations as he states, “what truly matters is not which party controls our government, but whether our government is controlled by the people.” I believe that President Trump gave a good speech. He stressed the importance of American unity, while stating his intentions to “Make America Great Again.”
1. During his Inaugural Address, Donald Trump called out the “Washington Establishment,” as he has done many times before in the past. Previously doing so benefited him in gaining support from those who felt slighted by the Obama administration and Congress because it made Trump appear far removed from those politicians. Now, however, calling out the “establishment” can possibly hurt him for the very same reasons. For instance, this rhetoric is divisive in nature and now that he is president, he must unite the country by uniting the government. Although President Trump seems to love issuing executive orders in his first few days in office, eventually he will need cooperation and support from both sides of the aisle in both houses of Congress if he wishes to fulfill his campaign promises.
ReplyDelete2. In his first address to the nation, President Trump spelled out what he hopes to accomplish in his term. He appealed to his constituents in promising to focus on putting America first by bringing back jobs, focusing on U.S. military funding rather than foreign aid, strengthening border security, and using his coined term, “Make America Great Again” to finish off the speech. On the other hand, his promises to improve infrastructure, get people off of welfare and back to work, and remove terrorist threats appealed to independent or opposing voters.
3. According to the video, I think that Trump made a decent speech. He kept the speech short in length and focused on principles rather than policy. Trump also used unifying vocabulary in his address, emphasizing “we,” “our nation,” and “the American people.” However, with such a tumultuous election season in the rear view mirror and a nation more divided than ever, I feel as though Trump could have made a greater effort to reassure the public of his limitations and put the campaign behind him in order to cement the unification that his words alluded to. Moreover, his focus on the “carnage” and “crime and gangs and drugs” puts a negative spin on his speech and doesn’t do much to lift up the hopes of our nation, especially those who may not have voted for Trump. All in all, I think that President Trump’s speech was great for the people who have supported him all along, but those who have had their doubts were likely left hoping for more to dispel their fears.
I agree with you in that Trump's speech was decent. I think that in was effective in some ways and ineffective in others. I agree that Trump used unifying language in his speech, but could have made a greater effort to reassure the public of his limitations. I agree with you in that he definitely did not leave his campaign behind him and that he created a negative spin on his speech by talking about crimes and gangs.
DeleteI agree with your point that this speech was great for people who have supported him all along, instead of reassuring the opposition that he will support them too. Because of this, I believed that his speech was very ineffective and that the candidate of Trump is still here rather than a unifying president.
DeleteI agree. In calling out the "Washington Establishment," Trump is definitely gaining the trust and confidence of his supporters. Yet he is also making it harder to work with his fellow politicians in the future, which would be very problematic.
DeleteI agree with your opinion that Trump gave a decent speech. It wasn't the best is could've been and he shows no want or desire to change anything from his campaign. He didn't really show that he's trying to unify the country.
DeleteI agree with your opinion in that calling out the "Washington Establishment" was good in the fact that it got support from those who thought the Obama Administration had wronged them. By Trump doing this, it was positive and showed he was a new kind of leader.
Delete1. Calling out the "Washington Establishment" had its pros and cons. On the positive side it showed that Trump wanted to hand the people back the power. He sees that the government has taken more power than it was originally supposed to have. He also takes himself of out the establishment and separates himself from other politicians. This all gives him a chance to restate his promises to the nation. Negatives include the rest of the government and politicians becoming annoyed at his decision because it takes power away from them.
ReplyDelete2. I believe that almost his entire speech appeals to his constituency voters. Everything he said appeals to their hopes for the country. As for the independent voters, I think Trump talking about focusing on America first and giving back to the people would appeal to them. Opposition voters might not have been swayed after this speech, but maybe took solace in the fact that the speech was toned down from his normal ways.
3. Based on the video Trump gave a good speech. He spoke of the divided nation and the ways he will try to mend it. He spoke of putting America first and building the infrastructure back to its former glory. Trump gives the power back to the people to show the government does not hold the power. It was short and to the point and spoke as "We" not "I."
I disagree with your second point. I understand that a large portion of the population don't want Trump in office however they should not let them influence his speech. He promised to improve infrastructure and create jobs (getting people off of welfare), remove ISIS and any additional forms of terrorism, reform education, eradicate prejudice, and uplift the middle class and economy like he promised in the speech. If he manages to do most of these things it would be hard to deny he had a bad presidency no matter what party a person affiliates with.
DeleteI agree with your first response; calling out the Washington establishment had many pros and cons. He directly insulted all of his new colleagues - those he will have to work with for the next few years.
Delete1. The positives of Trumps speech calling out Washington is that it shows he has not changed in this regard from his campaign. He and millions of people were not satisfied with past presidents and he clearly addressed his thoughts on how they didn't do there job according to Trump. However at the same time it creates more of a rift and more tensions because he accuses past presidents as the reason that we are here today.
ReplyDelete2. Trump managed to appeal to his constituents, independents and his opposition. First, he spoke about how everything done in this country will be done to benefit America and his goal of making the middle class wealthier. One thing many people support is getting rid of ISIS and he appeals to these people by talking about how he plans to eradicate ISIS. Also, he says "when you open your heart to patriotism, there is no room for prejudice" and even goes on to say how the people will become leaders of this nation again and the forgotten men and women will be forgotten no longer. Clearly in his speech he is trying to appeal to people who may not have voted for him with him saying how there is no room for prejudice and racism.
3. I believe that Trumps speech was good based off the video and what he said. He continuously tries uniting the country with many rhetorical lines such as we bleed the same blood or saying how we all have dreams and he wants people to be able to dream again. He could have gotten more into detail of his plans rather then just stating what he hopes to happen. For example, he talks about eradicating isis but does not say how or give any insight. Also, he talks about getting rid of corruption in Washington but gives no insight onto how he plans on doing this. Finally, he covered the third point when he said it does not matter what party controls government but if the people controlled by the people. He addresses here how the republicans have a majority but that does not mean anything if they do not do what the people want.
Overall, I feel that it was a good speech and left me excited for what he has to bring in the future. Im interested to see what he is able to achieve and so far in his first week he has hold true to his promises made.
JACOB <3. I agree with your first point. Calling out elitism and the establishment was very reminiscent of his campaign. It only strengthens the divide in society and shows that it may be difficult for him to work with both Washington insiders and partisan opponents. Overall, I think you raised a good concern as to the flaws of his first speech.
DeleteI agree with your views on his speech. It was successful and brought to attention the unity he wants for the country and that just because one party is in control, doesn't mean that we are not united. I agree he could've gone more into details about his plans, but the speech was in my opinion also successful because he kept it short and to the point.
DeleteI disagree with your second point in that he unites the country with his idea of patriotism fighting prejudice. Sure, this appeals to those with the same "America First" mentality, however it creates a stronger divide with those who are concerned with more than just good jobs for Middle America. Trump's actions have also constantly counteracted this idea that he is against prejudice. He has reached out the white American yet has called out and blamed minorities for America's problems. No matter how much patriotism you have, prejudice is still ever-present, and Trump has made a clear example that prejudice is okay when it concerns Muslims, blacks, Hispanics, or women. This united the forgotten white working men, but ignored the other parts of the population.
DeleteI do not agree with your third point. I do not believe that he really unified the country as he used very generic lines which merely do anything. I believe he needed to do more persuasion to bring the country back together.
DeleteI disagree with that he helped all three of his constituents, independents, and opposition in his speech with that evidence. By not mentioning specifically what he plans to do for the country, and specifically mentioning those issues, the opposition and independents won't have much hope in his skills as a president to the benefit the country as a whole. By just using the fact that more patriotism is needed, and that "forgotten members of the society will be leaders again" doesn't really give the people peace of mind and those sound like empty promises.
Delete1) By Trump calling out the "Washington Establishment" he was able to retain the support of his constituents and possibly gain the support of others who have not been happy with Washington in the past. As a negative by Trump calling out the establishment he has created an even larger divide between him and the rest of Washington. He should try to appeal more to his fellow politicians because he will need them to be effective.
ReplyDelete2) In Trumps speech he was able to appeal to all three groups, his constituents, opposition, and independent voters. By discussing jobs and that he will bring them back he appealed to his supporters. To his opposition and independent voters he talked about his promise to beat ISIS which is one thing that all Americans are wanting at this current moment. He also says that when you open your heart to patriotism there is no room for prejudice which is an issue that deeply divides our country today.
3) Trump gave a good speech based off of what the video had to say. Its overall length was short which allows for more impact to be felt from it. After talking to multiple people they were optimistic about the future of the country and our government. Unfortunately recent events have changed that drastically.
I agree with all three of your points. He definitely gained the support of his constituents by calling out the Washington Establishment because many of his supporters are sick of the way things have been run in the last eight years and want a change. I also agree that his speech was good and was short and to the point
DeleteIn calling out the "Washington Establishment," Trump is definitely gaining the trust and confidence of his supporters. Yet in doing so, he is working to create a divide between his fellow politicians. This could be highly problematic because they may not be as willing to help him in the future
Delete1. There were some positives of calling out the “Washington Establishment” in Donald Trump’s first speech as President. Trump’s entire campaign focused on the idea of change and reform. By calling out the Washington “Establishment”, he was able to ensure that the promises that he made during the campaign will be fulfilled during his presidency. He wanted to reach out to citizens of the United States who have not been happy with past presidents. He wanted to continue to promote the idea that change will come. Trump wanted to show that he aims to give power back to the citizens of the United States and take the power away from the government. The negatives of this action may include angering people who have been supporters of past presidents. Many past presidents have been respected and when Trump called them out, he could have created more tension and divided the country further.
ReplyDelete2.Donald Trump appealed to his constituency throughout this entire speech. He specifically talked about protecting the United States of America before protecting countries overseas. He wants to reduce military funding overseas and put that money into protecting our borders. I think that Donald Trump specifically appealed to independent and opposition voters when he spoke about benefiting America as a whole. He explained that he plans on taking the power from the government and giving it back to the citizens of the United States. He appealed to opposition voters specifically when mentioning bringing the parties together and working together to “Make America Great Again”.
3. Although I am not a fan of Donald Trump, I do think he had a somewhat effective speech. The video from VOX explained that there are three things that an inaugural address should contain: unifying the country, announcing guiding principles, and affirming the limits of power. According to the video’s checklist, Donald Trump had a good speech. Donald Trump tried to unify the country by using words such as “we”, “together”, “us”, “the people”, and “citizens”. He talked about forgetting the divide between the two parties and uniting together. As a democrat, I was always angered by Trump’s way of separating the two parties and creating greater tension between them. As I was watching his speech, I definitely saw improvement in his attempt at inclusion but most definitely not enough.Our country is in great tension and divide because of this election. There was no way one speech could heal that tension. Trump did announce guiding principles and affirmed the limits of power. I do think the speech was ineffective in some ways because of his constant repetition from things in his campaign. He kept mentioning the same things that we have been hearing for months.
I agree with your point that Trump's speech alone can't heal a divided nation, and I see how Trump was repetitive in his speech by repeating what he said during his campaign which made the speech less effective. I agree with how you said he was trying to bring both parties together, but ultimately, the country is still divided so his speech was not able to achieve the level of unity that he was hoping for.
DeleteI agree that calling out the Washington Establishment had many positives. It showed he was ready for change, which is what he ran his campaign off of. However, I think he may have done this a little too much because at the end of the day, he needs the Washington Establishment.
DeleteI agree with your point that one speech can not heal and unite the country that is divided so much from the past election. I also agree with the idea that he continued to mention the same things from his election campaign and did not elaborate and give any insight which could be a problem.
Delete1. In calling out the “Washington Establishment” in his inaugural address Trump deals with some positive and negative effects. Positively, Trump shows the country and the voters that he is not steering away from his campaign values. He believes that the government has more power than it can handle and that this country needs to give some of that power back to the people. Many of these people don’t believe that the Government did a very good job recently and that a change in approach may be necessary. Negatively, for the same reasons, Trump is taking himself out of the establishment that he is now apart of.
ReplyDelete2. Parts of Trump's speech appealed to his oppositional, independent, and constituent voters. His promises to improve infrastructure, get people off of welfare, create jobs, remove ISIS and any additional forms of terrorism, and reform education are in favor of his independent voters. Trump's commitments to give jobs back to American citizens, stop funding foreign military affairs, and to stand up for law enforcement. His promises cease prejudice, and uplift the middle class and economy are in favor of his oppositional voters. Overall, Trump's speech showed all of America he will do his best.
3. According to the checklist, yes Trump united the country regardless of Democrat, Republican, religious belief, or race. Now his actions recently may speak otherwise but as far as his speech goes, he did united the country, was short and to the point. Many may believe that it was more of a campaign speech but that’s just how our president delivers his point of view. In a rallying demeanor that gets everyone on the same page.
I disagree with your third point. Trump's campaign-style address had no focus on affirming the limits of power. Furthermore, his strong appeals to his supporters overshadowed his flimsy attempts at instilling national unity. All in all, while his speech was as unconventional as he is, but I dont think it was effective.
DeleteI agree with the third point, I think he did a very good job at trying to bring a sense of unity to the people. It was not flimsy.
Delete1. There are no positives to calling out the White House establishment besides further rallying his own supporters. All Trump did was shine for the minority of the country that elected him while ostracize the very people in Washington he needs to work with and the majority of the country and world that views him as nothing more than a demagogue. His address was more of a campaign speech than anything else, appealing to Middle America and showing disdain for the Washington insiders he will need to work with in order to enact change. All in all, it was a foolish way to start off his presidency.
ReplyDelete2. Trump appealed to his constituency more than anything in his address. His attempts at mentioning national unity were overshadowed by his emphasis on campaign promises and populism. He focused on his "America First" narrative which appealed to his supporters more than anything. While he did speak of being a President for all the people, it was pretty clear from this address he will be the President of those who elected him. Independents and the opposition saw little appeals and can see little hope from this campaign-style inaugural address and should prepare for 4 years of an agenda and administration with little room for compromise or unity.
3. Based on the video, Trump's speech was awful. He focused on his vague campaign promises supported by no policy details and despite some half-hearted attempts at a "unity" message, I think he only solidified the divide that is growing in this country. He neglected any mention of limiting power (rather that he would use is and potentially abuse it), focused on few core American principles but it sure did rally the mere 250,000 people in attendance. His speech was short and to the point, but it was certainly divisive which is very unlike his 44 predecessors.
I disagree with your first point. While I agree with saying it was a foolish way to start off. Trump was not trying to ostracize the people in Washington he was basically just telling them they need to step up. Everyone needs a wake up call every once in a while
DeleteI agree with all of your arguments especially for the third question; Trump did focus mainly on his campaign promises and barely attempted to unify the country.
DeleteI agree with a lot of your points here Holden. Attacking the establishment right off the bat definitely wasn't the best move to make because you're immediately dividing those that are for and against the establishment and it lends itself to a tone where he will be unwilling to cooperate, reflecting how he continually overlooks the necessity of working with established members of Congressmen. This promise to take down the establishment will definitely work against him in the next campaign, most likely limiting him to 4 years in office in my opinion. I also totally agree with your "unity" point in number 3. He really just repeatedly stated that we are unified without addressing and seeking to heal the obvious divides in our people. He spent too much time condemning the establishment and the "American carnage" to really focus on the future and how it will benefit everyone (which considering his policies would be a tough point to sell). It really started to sound like he was only talking to his constituents when talking about unity.
DeleteI disagree, the video says that in the inaugural address, the speech should focus on principles, not policy. If he were to include policy details, and the ways in which he would achieve his goals, that would be more of a campaign-style approach that you are accusing him of. Also, he does appeal to voters other than his constituents, unless they do not want better education, better infrastructure, a safer country, and supporting the middle class (all of which are also aspects of Hillary's campaign).
DeleteI completely agree with how this speech resembled a campaign speech in that he just spoke to his supporters and gave his vague plans. Also I agree with how calling out the "Washington Establishment" was a poor decision, because Trump is breaking a bond with the very people that he must work with in order to be an influential president
DeleteI agree your third point you made how he furthered the divide and his rhetoric and language was unlike any past presidents. He continued to continue how he was on campaign and see everything people want to hear but not say how or when he will do it.
Delete1. When Trump called out the Washington Establishment, it was met with both backlash and support. Some positives that occurred as a result was that it established sense of continuity, and it showed that positive change was going to come. It established a sense of continuity because it further supported his campaign and the actions he believes in, like bringing more power to the people rather than to central government. It demonstrated that he will continue to keep his word on changes he wishes to bring. It showed that a positive change would come because as a result, the people will have more power and more say on issues. Negative results from calling out the establishment was that it increased the tension between Trump and people who belong to the opposite party and supported Obama’s presidency. He basically claimed that the Obama administration took power away from the people, and supporters of Obama who were against Trump already are probably now even more against him.
ReplyDelete2. Although most of Trump’s speech was aimed towards his constituency, there were some parts aimed towards the independent voters and even his opposition voters. Throughout the speech, he would bring to attention the ideas that he wants to bring such as strengthening the borders, increasing jobs, increasing our wealth, and build new things such as roads, railroads, and highways. He appealed to the Independent voters by promising to return the power to the people rather than the government. He appealed to the opposing voters by promising to eliminate prejudices and improving the middle class. His words were particularly moving to any American, regardless if they support him or not, because we all want positive changes and that is exactly what he wishes to do.
3. Based on the video, I believe Trump’s speech was successful. It was short and to the point, as many great presidents have done in the past. He used “we” very often rather than “I” showing that he is not planning on doing everything on his own, he is united with the people. He focused more on principles rather than policies, and successfully unified the country by speaking out to everyone, even his critics and opposers. He also doesn’t say anything about the campaign or complained about “unfair events” and even peacefully transfers the power between the two parties. I believe that his speech was informative and showed that we will unite as a country and prosper as a result.
I agree with your points that he mentioned positive changes to come to our country which gave his speech a feeling of unity. I agree with your point that Trump's speech being shorter than other president's was effective because he kept the audience's attention.
DeleteI agree with your points on the basis that he put a lot of effort into addressing all of his constituents and that he had a very effective speech in which he voiced his plans and everything he hopes to accomplish while in office.
Delete1.Trump calling out the "Washington Establishment" can be seen as both positive and negative. It can be seen as positive because he is showing his voters that he is staying true to his campaign ideals, in that he doesn't want to be seen as a regular politician. Many believe that fact that Trump is not from the "Washington Establishment" is what got him elected since they believe he would bring change to the country. Trump calling out the establishment can also be seen as negative since he is creating a divide between him and Washington, even though he is now president and must learn to work together with Washington.
ReplyDelete2. The parts of Trump's speech that appealed to his constituency and stayed true to his campaign promises like strengthening the U.S. military and focusing on making America stronger, which stays true to his slogan, "make America great again." Trump also appealed to independent and opposition voters when he talked about defeating ISIS and reducing the terror threat. ISIS is a terrorist organization and most Americans, Democratic, Republican, or Independent, can agree that they want ISIS defeated.
3. I believe Trump tried in his speech to unify the country by focusing on all Americans and specifically saying that it doesn't matter which party controls our government, but that our government is ruled by the people, which can make someone feel patriotic.Trump also used words like "we" and "our" which further emphasized how he was trying to establish unity in the nation. The speech was not too long and drawn out which is positive because he hit the points her wanted to hit without losing viewers' attention. Overall, I think it was an effective speech.
I agree that Trump's discussion of defeating ISIS and terrorism can appeal to both independent voters and opposition voters as well because the topic itself unites the country against a common goal. Also, I agree his word choice in his speech did aid in uniting the nation .
DeleteTrump’s calling out of the white house esablishment is positive because he forfeits the power to the people, saying he will give back power to the people in order to limit the government taking advantage of its citizens. He makes this very clear, repeating over and over that the people will not be forgotten, because they will have a voice and have a say. However, this is so ironic because he did not win the popular vote so he did not win plurality and has no mandate given by the citizens. So, yes, he calls for a restructuring of power amongst the government and its people, yet the majority of the people had no say in electing the president, and many voices were squashed under his tiny hands.
ReplyDeleteSome points in President’s Trump’s speech that reflect that of the constituency is his opinions on energy, such as eliminating the Climate Action Plan and take advantage of untapped oil reserves on American soil. The constituency would also support expanding the size of the military. Independent voters would most likely be in favor of domestic job growth and lower taxes for everyone regardless of social status. Opposition voters would also be in favor of lower taxes, and working towards a better plan to control Isis.
I think President Trump’s speech was successful. He used “we” a lot, which proves that he is no better than the law because it groups himself with his citizens. Also, by using “we”, he unites the country as one. He also unites the country by saying the transfer of power is not from one party to another but from the government to the people. He also speaks about good schools and good neighborhoods, which is more principle than policy. The same with his ideas of more military spending, more spending on infrastructure, and protecting oneself rather than helping other countries. However, overall the speech was very negative and discussed not what the future holds, but what the past held.
I agree with the fact that Trump uses "we" a lot to put himself on the same level as the people. It shows that even as a big time business owner, and now president, he does not consider himself to be above anyone else.
Delete1.By calling out the “Washington Establishment,” he ignored the fact that he needs to work with people like Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell. It conveys a mentality that he alone, without the support of the Washington Establishment, can fulfill his campaign promise of making America great again. It can be seen as a positive because it appeals to the people who already supported him and reassures them that they will be helped the most throughout this presidency as he completely changes the current establishment.
ReplyDelete2.Trump spoke mainly to his constituency with his same vague campaign promises of securing borders, having an “America First” mentality and bringing back US jobs, all reasons people voted for him. The only thing that may have appealed to independent and opposition voters was the promise to eradicate radical Islamic terrorism which is an issue that everyone can agree they desperately want solved.
3.I do not think he delivered a good speech. Instead of unifying the extremely divided electorate, he instead re-solidified the fears of many. He only reached out to the people who had voted for him instead of reassuring women, minorities, and LGBTQ members that he will protect them. He even stated that “We all enjoy the same glorious freedoms,” ignoring the ever-present denial of freedoms to these groups. I still felt that the candidate of Trump was there, not a president who will unite the nation. The “America First” mentality disregarded those who prioritize international trade, climate change, and human rights on a global scale. This speech was directed at less than half of the country.
ReplyDelete1. One positive of calling out the Washington Establishment in his first speech as President are that it appeals to his constituents who dislike the typical Washington Establishment and he knows that this is a sizable segment given the response on his campaign and he makes himself appear more like a man of the people, and relating to more common people is something he knew he had to work on in order to unite America. Another positive of calling out the Washington Establishment in his first speech as President is that he invokes a similar sentiment as President Reagan when he said “Government is not the solution to our problem. Government is the problem” in his address; several comparisons have been drawn between President Reagan and President Trump. The negative aspect of calling out the Washington Establishment in his first speech as President are that, whether he likes it or not, President Trump needs the Washington Establishment, or, at least, certain parts of it, to get any of his goals accomplished.
2. When President Trump said “One by one, the factories shuttered and left our shores, with not even a thought about the millions and millions of American workers that were left behind. The wealth of our middle class has been ripped from their homes and then redistributed all across the world,” he was appealing to his constituents who were upset with American wealth and jobs leaving America. Additionally, when President Trump said, “The Bible tells us how good and pleasant it is when God's people live together in unity. We must speak our minds openly, debate our disagreements honestly, but always pursue solidarity,” he was appealing to his constituents who, on average, were religious and adhered to the teachings of the Bible; religious aspects are common in inaugural addresses. When President Trump said “Do not allow anyone to tell you that it cannot be done. No challenge can match the heart and fight and spirit of America. We will not fail. Our country will thrive and prosper again. We stand at the birth of a new millennium, ready to unlock the mysteries of space, to free the earth from the miseries of disease, and to harness the energies, industries and technologies of tomorrow. A new national pride will stir ourselves, lift our sights and heal our divisions. It's time to remember that old wisdom our soldiers will never forget, that whether we are black or brown or white, we all bleed the same red blood of patriots,” he appealed most to independent voters because he proposes hope for the future and does not single any one group or demographic out as good or bad. When President Trump said, “At the bedrock of our politics will be a total allegiance to the United States of America, and through our loyalty to our country, we will rediscover our loyalty to each other,” he appealed most to opposition voters because even if you happen to dislike President Trump, any American can agree with patriotism and loyalty to the nation.
ReplyDelete3. According to the video, a good inaugural address should do three things: unify the country, announce guiding principles, and affirm the limits of power. President Trump most certainly accomplished the first criteria: unify the country. He repeated the need to come together several times. President Trump used collective rhetoric and words like “our” and “we” instead of “my” and “I.” President Trump accomplished the second criteria. He laid out a plan for foreign policy: bring jobs back to America and retain American wealth. These two goals outline and further the principle of restoring American power. President Trump did not mention policy and did not remain in campaign mode, but transitioned to more diplomatic mannerisms. President Trump, however, failed the third criteria, which may have been a conscious tactic eve if the video does not see it as such. President Trump realizes that there is a sizable portion of people who feel powerless as minority members with him as president. In a possible move to counteract this, President Trump expressed nothing but the ability to strive collectively for all Americans; President Trump attempted to include all of those he possibly excluded on his campaign trail. I personally think that President Trump gave a good speech. He employed a more “presidential” look and drew upon strategies used by many past presidents during their inaugural addresses: referring to religion, attempting to empower the people, and still remaining true to who he said he would be as president.
1) A positive affect of calling out the 'Washington Establishment' is that it appeals to the sentiments of a majority of America's working class and lower class or those who have become disenfranchised by the actions of career politicians in the past. Also, by giving a name to the very real presence that is the establishment, Trump further solidifies his persona as one that is a 'man of the people.' The drawbacks to ostracizing the 'Washington Establishment' include just that; lessening any possible support that may have resided within the party demogogues; people he may very well rely on the support of in order to implement his ambitious policies. He is rallying Washington insiders who have connections and influence against him which may come back to sting not only during his presidency, but also when it comes time to run for reelection.
ReplyDelete2)I believe his constituency was most pleased with the fragments of the speech that concerned the combating of radical islamic terrorism; as he has assured them that more direct action will be taken. Also his overarching policy of 'America First' appeals to his constituents who have long believed that America constantly sacrifices its own needs over that of nations that quite possibly don't contribute what they should back. Independent voters are most likely pleased by Trump's promises to rebuild and reinforce America's crumbling infrastructure, as well as his promises to keep the country protected in the face of international terrorist threats. Finally a point that may have appealed to his opposition is his vendetta against inner city poverty and his quest to combat the affects of urban poverty on the education and welfare of struggling families and children. As well as his supposed opposition of discrimination.
3)While I think Trump delivered a satisfactory speech with excellent points and policy prompts that will satisfy all sides; his delivery was stiff and practiced; and seemed too impersonal and real as opposed to his style of delivery during the campaign trail. It seems too rehearsed and as though he is just saying enough to get by. However his overarching message of restoring pride and patriotism in one's own nation and call for unity is an appropriate enough message for such an event.
1) In his first speech as president, Donald Trump called out the “Washington Establishment.” There are many pros and cons for having done so. The pros to this are that he is voicing all the problems that have existed for years and states that he plans to not only address these issues, but make sure that he can reverse the damages to the best of his abilities. In doing so, he is not only giving his supporters exactly what they want to hear, but he is ensuring that people gain confidence in his abilities. The fact that he holds such sympathy for the common man and hopes to serve in their favor works to rally the people behind his beliefs and causes. The cons to calling out the “Washington Establishment” are that he’s just become president and yet there is tension brewing between him and those within the system. He is calling all these individuals in office “selfish” and potentially alienating them against him. This could potentially lead to him facing a lot of opposition in the future when he tries to pass any form of legislation.
ReplyDelete2) Personal bias set aside, I do in fact believe that this was a highly effective speech in appealing to his constituents. A lot of the values he argued for in his campaign molded his constituency and he is following through with those values. By promising to cut funding for foreign military affairs he is promising a more peaceful world with less conflict and less military involvement. In addition to this, by planning to bring back jobs and economic growth alongside with advocating for our law enforcement community, he is appealing to his constituent voters. The portions of his speech for which he is appealing to his independent voters include eliminating radical islamic threats, improving education and infrastructure, and making sure that the people who are living off of a hardworking persons taxes would be taken off welfare.
3) In accordance to the checklist offered in the video as to what deems an inaugural address effective, President Trump did in fact have a very strong and effective speech. He did work to try to bring everyone together in his speech as well as announce his guiding principles. He constantly addresses that the nation is in fact divided but that he will work to bring us together. In addition to this he vividly laid out a guideline for what he hopes to expect and accomplish during his time in office. He failed to affirm the limits of power in the sense where he didn’t exactly address where he may come across some difficulty or be unable to complete any tasks. Personally, I do believe that he gave a good speech because he followed through with addressing everything he hopes to accomplish as president, as well as working to unify the country. Everything he spoke of was in regards to the people as a whole, not just a fraction of them. During his presidency he hopes to accomplish many things in favor of reinforcing the nation's infrastructure as well as bolstering the economy.
I definitely did notice that he was addressing the nation as a whole in his speech, not just a fraction of the population like you said in your answer to the third question.
DeleteI agree that he did address the nation as a whole rather than as a fraction, and that would be a plus for him if the nation at least tolerated him to an extent. He should have acknowledged that the nation was split in half, and he should have explained how he will truly make the nation united rather than separated by political parties.
DeleteI agree Trump gave an effective speech. Most aspects of his campaign were highlighted in his speech and he did follow through with those values. He was successful in laying out his plans for the country and addressing everyone as Americans rather than dividing categories.
DeleteI completely agree with your first statement. Calling out the Washington Establishment solidified the fact that Trump planned to address and solidify the issues present in government, but his statement alienates him from the rest of Washington. This tension could serve him more harm than good throughout his presidency. However, I do not particularly agree with your third statement. While I agree that this was definitely Trump's most inclusive speech yet, it was certainly not enough to ease the worries of the people that feel his presidency will have a negative affect on their personal lives.
Delete1. Donald Trump made very bold statements in his Inauguration. Calling out the Washington Establishment was very controversial in my opinion. Obviously, the way Washington has been run has been consistent for decades. For a controversial candidate such as himself, to promise to return the power to the people is a big promise. He is a businessman and he is speaking as if he is going to run a business. He wants to make the country wealthy and happy. A positive is that he is showing the change the people want to see. He is also fulfilling his campaign promises which shows promise in a president. However his business-owner persona is off putting. Also Trump very much needs the Washington Establishment if he wishes to have any kind of success.
ReplyDelete2. Appealed to
a. Constituency: “We will bring back our jobs. We will bring back our borders. We will bring back our wealth. And we will bring back our dreams. We will build new roads, and highways, and bridges, and airports, and tunnels, and railways all across our wonderful nation. We will get our people off of welfare and back to work -- rebuilding our country with American hands and American labor. We will follow two simple rules: Buy American and hire American”. These promises are why Trump was elected by his voters and if he can follow through with these he will gain popularity. His constituents want change and this appeals to them because this is what he is promising.
b. Independent voters: “Because today we are not merely transferring power from one administration to another, or from one party to another -- but we are transferring power from Washington, D.C. and giving it back to you, the American People. That all changes -- starting right here, and right now, because this moment is your moment: it belongs to you”. Both of these quotes appeal to independent voters because they want more power. They are not aligned to one party or the other, but rather who can help them out the most. These voters would appreciate having more power in their hands and less in the hands of the government.
c. Opposition voters: “We are one nation -- and their pain is our pain. Their dreams are our dreams; and their success will be our success. We share one heart, one home, and one glorious destiny”. At the end of the day, Trump is the president and for the next four years, nothing can be done about that. This would appeal to opposition voters because everyone wants a united nation, regardless of if you do or do not like Trump.
3. Trump gave a decent speech. He did touch upon all of the makings of a good speech, however, these attempts were not very meaningful. He did talk about how we are one country, however saying that is very different from acting like it. Many people still feel as divided as they did before, so just because he said it, doesn't make it meaningful. He started to share the principals in the beginning, however, he changed it to his goals and what he will do. He also affirmed limitations in some ways. On the other hand, it was relatively short, he did not mention the campaign and also talked about the country as a whole. It was a decent speech.
1. There are many positives and negatives when calling out the "Washington Establishment". When calling out the "Washington Establishment" he is showing that he is not like previous politicians, which is a main cause as to why he was nominated in the first place. He promised to fix the corrupt "Washington Establishment" so that american citizens can finally get what they deserve, he wants to show the american people that he is one of them. However, Trump is calling out the same people he is going to work with. If he truly wants to do everything that he's promised then he is going to need to work with them, this might be difficult if other politicians hold a grudge for his comments.
ReplyDelete2. Different parts of Trump's speech appealed to his constituent, independent, and oppositional voters. Trump made many campaign promises like to stop funding foreign military affairs, give jobs back to American citizens, and to stand up for law enforcement which will make his constituent voters happy. The large portion of the population that didn't know what to do will like his promises to improve infrastructure and create jobs (getting people off of welfare), remove ISIS and any additional forms of terrorism, and reform education. Trump has a very up hill battle to make his opposiotional voters happy but if he does eradicate prejudice, and uplift the middle class and economy he might be able to do just that. are in favor of his opposiotional voters. Overall, based off Trump's speech every type of voter could benefit under his presidency.
3. According to the video Donald Trump the speech that Trump gave was effective. He covers the three of the topics of the video, uniting the country, speaking of principle and not policy, and affirming limitations. His speech was relatively short and covers the areas that his supporters wanted when they voted for him.
I thought that the speech was good, he covered the topics that the people wanted and it seems that he tried to unite a country that is incredibly divided. I thought the address was well-made and well-organized.
1. Trump calling out the "Washington Establishment" in his speech helps to support his whole campaign goals. Throughout President Trump's campaign he constantly said that he was going to root out the corruption of politicians and by calling out the "Washington Establishment" he solidifies this claim. The negative to calling out the "Washington Establishment" is that it shows distrusts the government and grants a sense of disunity.
ReplyDelete2. In his speech President Trump appealed to his constituency by addressing the fact that he will bring jobs back to America, put America first and he will Make America Great again. In President Trump's speech he appealed to independent voters is when he said that he is gonna bring back jobs to the US and that he was going to defeat Isis as well as rebuild infrastructure. The portions of Trump's speech that appealed to opposition voters is when he said he was gonna increase the wealth of the middle class as well as lower the amount of terrorism and crime.
3. Based on the video I believe that president Trumps speech was a successful. In his speech he did not bring up is bitter campaign nor did he ostracize his opposition voters. Instead the president used the word "we" a lot which helps to show unity for all citizens. The president also talks about how he will improve infrastructure and utilities for all Americans. Finally towards the end of his speech he showed that we are ll one by saying "No matter what color your skin we all bleed red" showing that he supports all people no matter the race.
I do not entirely agree with your second point as defeating Isis and rebuilding the infrastructure was not a major issue. Yes terrorism is a threat along with the infrastructure but both were going to be taken care of no matter who won. He should have focused on more concerning topics that people have made an uproar about instead of a generic problem.
DeleteI agree with greg in that terrorism is not this major issue because either way no matter who is president that terrorism will be handled. This is because defeating terrorism will almost ensure reelection. It will boost moral in America and unite the people with the president.
Delete1. There were positive and negatives that came from Trump calling out the "Washington Establishment" in his first speech as President. A positive was that he was able to maintain his image as a different kind of president. He isn't from the "Washington Establishment" and a lot of his supporters are hoping that he'll bring change into the government. A negative is that he set him self apart from the government. Trump is going to need the government's support more than anyone else's, yet he pointed out all of its flaws. By doing so, he's undertaken a very big job, one that he might not be able to complete alone.
ReplyDelete2. Trump mostly appealed to his constituency in his speech. He talked a lot about his campaign promises of securing our borders and bringing back jobs into the US. His promise to end radical Islamic terrorism was something that appealed to everyone, including independent and opposition voters.
3. The video from VOX said that three things are needed to make a good and solid inaugural address. It needs to "unify the country, announce guiding principles, and affirm the limits of power." I think Trump's speech had all of those guidelines. He kept on saying "we" in his speech to show that he was speaking for everyone. He had clear goals in his speech that showed more of what he aims to do as president. And, he made it clear that "the people" hold and will always hold the power in America, showing the limits of his own power.
1. In his speech, President Trump called out the Washington establishment which had some positive and negative effects. Through his calling out of the Washington establishment, Trump appeased his supporters and reassured them that he is not part of the Washington establishment which shows that he will truly work for the American people. However, Trump created enormous expectations for himself during his time as president which he will have to fulfill in order to be re-elected also Trump's comments could also very well create divisions in Congress which could present problems when he tries to pass a bill.
ReplyDelete2. Trump appealed to his constituency by stating that he wants to bring back our borders. He also stated he would bring back our jobs and our factories from foreign countries and discussed ridding the world of radical Islamic terrorism which should appeal to both independent and opposition voters.
3. Trump continued to discuss unifying the country by stating that he will be a president for all Americans.Trump also continued on this narrative by stating that no matter what skin color, gender or ethnic background, "we all bleed the same red of patriots." Trump also stated that "when you open your heart to patriotism, there is no room for prejudice." Trump also outlined his goals very clearly of securing our borders and bringing jobs back to America. Finally Trump made it clear that at the end of the day what matters is that people control the government. This all shows that President Trump's inaugural address "unified the country,announced guiding principles and affirm the limits of power."
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1. The Positives about calling out the "Washington Establishment" is that he stayed true to himself by letting everyone know what he feels. Also it shows more about how he is not afraid of hurting others feelings. The negatives is that he basically trashed all other presidents before him and he also kinda put himself above everyone who came before him. This might have angered many Americans.
ReplyDelete2.Trump has remained persistent and consistent by nailing into the peoples heads his campaign promises of bringing the workforce back to America and building a wall that will help to keep our borders safe. The part that would appeal to independent voters and opposition voters was his plans to rid of Islamic terrorism. I think all people would be happy if he could accomplish this
3.Trumps Inauguration speech was an overall success because he quoted Bane from Batman. On a more serious note he talked about a lot of good things and continued to be consistent on what he wanted to get done while in office. I think he will get the job done and people will realize he is not as bad as they think he is.
1. By calling out the Washington establishment, Donald Trump has set "yuge" standards for himself. The positives for doing so is that whether a voter supported him or was against him, they had no choice but to consider what he was saying. He called out all politicians for being just talk which makes it seem as though he will be different, regardless of how people think of him. However, the negatives of such outrageous beliefs are that he may come off as a hypocrite, or he may come off as just ignorant. As a man who is constantly seen as someone who conflicts themselves constantly may have this idea backfire on him. Also, calling out the Washington establishment means he has called out the people he will be working with for hopefully the next 4 years.
ReplyDelete2. Trump appealed to his constituency by restating the ideas that brought him into office in the first place. He made it clear that he would do as he promised and that he would not let the American people down. He appealed to independent voters as he accidentally quoted Bane from the Dark Knight Rises when he talks about taking America and giving it back to the people. Any independent voter could get behind Batman being referenced. Being serious, Trump creating the idea that America could be in charge may sway an independent voter in his favor. By referencing the fight against terrorism and increasing the wealth of the middle class, the opposition may consider his views without immediately denying the claims.
3. Trump did not give a good speech because he practically avoided explaining how he would be unifying the country through his ideals, but rather he pretends we are all united. He mostly stuck to what seemed to be his script since the campaign and did not try to figure out how to unite the country. The length of the speech was perfect for a Trump supporter, but for anybody else including myself, he rambled on for too long and kept dancing around the same ideas. He was not very specific in saying how he'd do what he says he will do, but acts as though the American public as a whole would believe him blindly. He is a good public speaker and he kept his supporters involved, but anybody that had not supported him from the start did not hear nearly enough for Trump's speech to be considered successful.
I definitely agree with you that Trump's anti-establishment rhetoric may wind up coming back to make him a hypocrite. Especially considering the fact that Trump will be trying to fight literally everyone he has to cooperate with in Washington, I think he'll ultimately wind up not getting half as much done as he promises which will add to that. And yes, quoting Batman definitely gets everyone on board, absolutely, not a doubt in my mind. I also definitely feel like he danced around certain ideas too long like the long list of infrastructure projects he mentioned. It kind of got to a point where it's just like, "yes, we know what infrastructure is."
Delete1) By attempting to call out the "Washington establishment" right from the beginning of his inauguration speech, Donald Trump made a very risky move. While this helped contribute to his message of representing the "forgotten men and women" of this country against a Washington backdrop that used to "ignore" them, he runs the chance of offending politicians with whom he still needs to cooperate. During his inauguration speech, not all of Trump's cabinet members and appointees had been approved yet, so he needs cooperation with Washington's leaders. In general, he will need to cooperate with this "establishment" all throughout his administration, so making a fight against the "establishment" the crux of his administration could come back to bite him in the future. Furthermore, Trump overlooks the fact that not every voter in America was necessarily "anti-establishment," which means that this rhetoric goes contrary to the goal of uniting the American people after an especially divisive campaign season. I feel that ultimately, by talking so much about the past and the "American carnage" brought about by this "failing establishment," Trump brought about a very negative connotation to the majority of his speech, which doesn't really build up American optimism or patriotism which he claims is so vital to our nation's future.
ReplyDelete2) The vast majority of Donald Trump's inaugural address appealed to his constituency seeing that continued his battle with the "Washington establishment" while also maintaining his principles that he stressed during the campaign such as putting "America first" and focusing more on our country's defense and development rather than international affairs. Furthermore, his approach to foreign policy demands less negotiating and more military approach to external threats, such as terrorism. He then attempted to appeal to independent and opposing Americans through calls for improved infrastructure and improvement to our inner city environment.
3) Compared to other inaugural addresses, I'd definitely argue that Trump's inaugural address wasn't successful just looking at the reaction to his speech. While he used abundant rhetoric to state that America is united, he didn't actually unify the country because we weren't already unified coming into this speech. Just looking at the reaction to his inauguration in the form of the Women's March the next day, one can see that Trump didn't really address his opposers and convince them to put aside their differences to accept his leadership. Quite frankly, Trump's rhetoric was just as abrasive during his inaugural address as it was during the campaign, going out of it's way to focus more on past "failures" of an administration to unify the people rather than emphasizing potential benefits of his administration. Trump also failed to affirm the limits of power in any way during his speech, ultimately just stressing his principles which, I will reluctantly hand to him, were easy to understand and were clearly laid out. Granted he sometimes went a bit too far with his repetition to the point where he kind of killed the point he was making (like "airports AND roads AND bridges AND tunnels..."). While I think Trump can put together some interesting rhetorical aspects in his speech, it wasn't effective in actually proving a point and achieving the necessary criteria to be a successful inaugural speaker.
1. When Donald Trump called out the Washington Establishment it had both positive and negative affects. Trump does this and immediately separates himself from the conventional politicians who have been in Washington. In doing this he makes a point that he will not be like them but, will strive for change. A negative in doing this is that he is going to be new in the office and has already called out congress. Trump will have to work with these people who he has now created a greater divide between.
ReplyDelete2. I believe he appealed to his constituency when he referenced strengthening the military as that was a large past of his plan. He appealed to the independent voters when he said that no one will be ignored. Trump wants to reassure all the independent voters what he will be there for them. He appealed to the opposition during the part where he talked about fighting Islamic radicals. He said how he plans on taking on these terrorists and defeating them which is something everyone can agree on.
3. Based on that video I believe that Donald Trump did not give a good speech. During that speech he did not do a good job as he did not unify the country in his speech. In my opinion this is one of the most important aspects as he is not the most popular president with all the protests. Along with that he talked about some policy which did in no way unify the people. He needed to talk more about principles during his speech. Also he made no references to the limitation of power.
I agree with you that he appealed to all Americans when he reassured them that everyone will be heard during his time as president.
DeleteI disagree that Trump did not give a good speech. I thought his speech although not great was good. He kept it brief and was able to appeal to his opponents through defeat of ISIS and Islamic radicals.
Delete1. There are both positives and negatives to Trump calling out the Washington Establishment in his inauguration speech. One of the positives is that it will help gain support from Americans who are fed up with the current state of American Politics. There is a large group of Americans who are unpleased with the politics in Washington. Trump appeals to this groups desires by offering them a break from typical American politics. He promises to take the US Government in a different direction. One negative of Trump's speech is that he just insulted the rest of the United States Government in front of the entire country. This may damage relations with people that he will need to work with for the next four years. These damaged relations may hinder his ability to function competently as our president.
ReplyDelete2. Trump's speech not only appealed to his supporters, but also independent voters and people who voted against him. His speech contained aspects that appeals to a large portion of the voting population. Bringing back jobs to the United States is something that almost every American would support. His claims of eliminating ISIS and radical islamic terrorism can garner support from all different types of American voters.
3. According to the video, I do believe that Trump did give a good speech. Trump's speech used language to help American citizens feel united. One of the main focus of his speech was eliminating the divide between the American people and working together to make the country great again. Trump made it clear that his powers as a president come directly from the people's consent. He did not make it seem that he will go on an uncontrollable power trip now the he has been elected as president. He also did not bring up many of the controversies that riddled his campaign.
I agree that many Americans are displeased with the way politics are today, and many people like the idea of taking power away from the establishment. I agree that many parts of the speech do appeal to all voters, in that they are objective for the most part (more jobs, eliminating terrorism), and will make America better.
DeleteI agree with your second point in that creating jobs and eliminating ISIS were two major points of his campaign, and he is following up on his promises.
Delete1. In calling out the Washington Establishment, Trump appeals to the common man, showing he is on their side. He plans to bring power back to the people, rather than the politicians. Negative effects in doing this may be that politicians may be less likely to cooperate with him, making it more difficult to pass legislation.
ReplyDelete2. The portions of the speech that appealed to his constituency are those which spoke of bringing back jobs to America, supporting the middle class, securing borders, and putting America first.
The portions of the speech that appealed to independent voters were when he spoke of improving education, making the nation safer for families, and supporting the middle class. The opposition was likely appealed to when he spoke about fighting terrorism, supporting the middle class, and unifying America.
3. I believe Trump did deliver a good speech, in that it outlined the goals of his presidency. He followed the guidelines of an effective speech by emphasizing the need to unify the country, laying out the plans for his presidency, and keeping it concise and to the point
I agree with what you said about how Trump appealed to his base of supporters. He discussed jobs and securing the border which are two of his key points during his campaign.
Delete1. Within his Inaugural Address, President Trump criticized the "Washington Establishment," and its inability to provide for the people of the United States. This tactic has both its benefits and its drawbacks;by criticizing the "Washington Establishment," Trump stood by the rhetoric he often utilized during his campaign, in that he wished to make major changes in how our nation is governed in order to help the citizens rather than merely helping the politicians, by "bringing power back to the people." Trump's promise for major changes is likely the reason why he was elected in the first place, so to reinforce this idea in his Inaugural Address would help his approval ratings. However, one can assume that criticizing the "Washington Establishment" will not sit well with the other members of government, such as Congress. To criticize how our government is run at the very first day of taking office may entail many issues between the executive and legislative branches in the future.
ReplyDelete2. Donald Trump's speech, although brief,sought to appeal to a large amount of Americans, if not all Americans. Many aspects of his speech appealed to his supporters, the major of which being his criticism of the "Washington Establishment" and the government's lack of aid to the middle class and common man. Also,Trump mentioned the desire to keep jobs and factories from moving out of the country, which too appealed to his supporters. As for independents, he made points of how the change in political party "in power" has no significance, as it is the whole body of American people who are truly in power. As for his opposition, Trump seemed to keep from spewing any questionable, controversial lines, but instead he utilized language to evoke the point of unity amongst the American people (contrary to what Shia Labeouf may think).
3. Based on the criteria in the Vox video, President Trump did indeed deliver a good speech, as it was not too long (only lasting roughly 15-20 minutes), it unified the people, and did not go into any specific political agenda. Although Trump did mention his distaste with the displacement of American factories and jobs, that was likely to establish the principles which he plans to enforce during his presidency rather than to reinforce his campaign or image. Also,he made it clear that he wanted the power of the US Government to reside not with him, but the people of the nation, which essentially established a self-limitation of power. Personally, I thought his speech was respectable in his goal to unite people rather than divide them, but simultaneously not quite captivating as it could have been. It is very possible I am just too used to hearing him make remarks about "Crooked" politicians and the size of his (hands) to find anything else he says truly enthralling.
I do agree with you that Trump refrained from saying anything too controversial like in the past and for the most part got his point across.
DeleteI agree that though brief, he was able to get all the points across and deliver a fairly effective speech. Throughout, he kept emphasizing the power of the people, therefore bringing him down to the American people's levels.
DeleteI agree with your first point, if Trump continues to criticize the very establishment that he is now a part of, it could lead to conflict when working with the other two branches of government.
Delete1) In calling out the "Washington Establishment", President Trump ultimately did two things. The first of which was appeal to the ideals and values of his target audience, those who voted for him. Throughout his campaign, Trump initiated the idea that he sought to do away with politicians who didn't put the voters first and continued to entertain this notion in his speech. This subsequently forced the voters, inclusive of those who may not have voted in his favor to at least consider what he was saying and proved that it was not just a false facet of his campaign. On the other hand, while grabbing the attention of many, he also made more enemies in Washington than he originally had. At the time of his speech, not all of his cabinet member had been approved of so this has potential to have several turnarounds.
ReplyDelete2)Trump appealed to his constituency by continuing to entertain his goal of tearing apart the "Washington Establishment". Several times throughout the 20 minute speech, Trump mentioned his aspirations in doing this and it grabbed the attention of many people who may have not voted for him. Trump reached out to independent voters in his speech by touching on key facets including infrastructure and improving environments for the middle class.
3) I feel that in comparison to other inaugural addresses, Trump was not effective, however on its own, it was successful in several facets. Initially comparing the dull tone of his voice to the hopeful and powerful tone of Obama, it was quickly made difficult to find a prosperous instance in his speech. However, as the speech progressed, Trump touched on many key subjects that ultimately turned it around and ended on a positive note. When referencing the criteria in the VOX video, Trump failed to deliver an effective speech to his audience. Very solemn did the President go into detail on the points he made.
1. By calling out the “Washington Establishment,” Trump is able to draw upon the crowd’s hunger for change and instill anger in the crowd as well as support for his presidency. Those who feel “forgotten” find this appealing because they crave certain demands and changes that Trump advocates for in his speech. Many of his supporters are further invigorated by Trump’s criticism of the government. However, on the other hand, by doing so, Trump also insulted government. He essentially accuses many government officials for working to benefit themselves and not the people of America. Although his speech did encourage many of his own supporters, his speech also angered many supporters of the Washington Establishment and those who have worked or supported those working in Washington. Members of Congress may also dislike the way he had delivered his speech, finding it offensive. In the future, there may be more disputes when Trump has to work with Congress.
ReplyDelete2. Most, if not all, of Trump’s speech was aimed to appeal to his constituency and did so successfully. By promising more job opportunities in regards to returning the glory of American industry, to strengthen the military, and stricter border security, he emphasized the popular aspects of his campaign among his supporters. Reforming education and improving infrastructure could have appealed to independent voters as well as the idea of returning the rule to the people again. Although the opposition may disagree with what Trump advocates for, they may find some portions of his speech appealing. For example, Trump did a good job in unifying the crowd as Americans and not divided groups, races, religions, or political parties. He also appealed to the opposition when he discussed helping the middle class, which was an important aspect of the opposing campaign.
3. According to the video, a good speech is able to unify the country, declare clear principles, and affirm the limits of power, while keeping it within a reasonable length. Overall Trump was able to unite the country as he addressed the people as Americans several times referring to pronouns like “we” instead of “you” and “I,” creating a more approachable tone rather than clearly defining his isolating position as a President. He also repeatedly brought up the idea of returning the power to the people, which affirms the power of the government and the President himself. Also, while keeping it short, Trump laid out the blueprint to his presidency by announcing his goals as well as addressing existing issues and his plans and solutions for them. Since Trump was able to cover all three points mentioned in the video, he delivered a good speech. Personally, I also think he gave a good speech because while I was listening to it, I didn’t think about the negatives and scandals that have followed him during the election. His speech gave me a clear indication of his intentions and plans for the country and I’d say it was encouraging.
1. Donald Trump calling out the "Washington Establishment " both helps and hurts him. President Trump campaigned against the establishment and used the fact that he was an outsider to his advantage. By calling out Washington in his speech assured his supporters that he will fulfill his promises and make changes. The common, working class Americans who felt left out and couldn't relate to the politicians in Washington had to be pleased when Trump called them out. The negative side of doing that is it divides the people and parties even further. Trump will have to work with the people in Washington once president in all branches of government. After such a heated and chaotic campaign calling out Washington so heavily could have hurt his speech.
ReplyDelete2. A large portion of Trumps speech was aimed towards his constituents. He appealed to them mostly by speaking about things he promised to do such as secure U.S borders, drain the swamp in Washington and have "America First". He could have appealed to both independent and opposing voters when speaking about improving infrastructure, education and destroying ISIS.
3. Based on the video I don't believe Trump had a very effective speech. He for the most part didn't really help to reunite the people of America. He got into his specific policies a little too much as well. I especially thought that the speech felt and sounded too much like one of his campaign rallies.
1) Donald Trump calling out the establishment is a bold, however expected move from our new president. It can go both ways, as it perhaps inspires Washington to get more done and can motivate the american people. However, in doing so he is also calling out all the members of Washington that he will have to work with, all of which have been there longer than he has.
ReplyDelete2) In my opinion, Trumps speech did a good job of appealing to his voters, independents, as well as the opposition. He references uplifting the middle class, and unifying America which can appeal towards many opposition voters. He spoke on removing Isis, creating jobs, and jump starting construction of infrastructure, which can unite independent voters. Then he discussed strengthening the military and having a president, "for the people" which speaks to his supporters.
3) I believe Trump gave the best speech he could have under the circumstances given. One of thee major points of a good speech is uniting the country, but given how disengaged the nation currently is, no speech could have possibly united the country immediately. I believe that he did do a good job of stating what he wants to accomplish while in office, and I believe he did also affirm the limits of his power. Given the situation that this nation is in, it is tough to judge how successful his speech was right now, however I believe he did the best he could under the circumstances.
1) The positives of calling out the "Washington Establishment" are that it shows how President Trump firmly believes his way of running the country will be different. This was almost his campaign slogan, how he wasn't wrapped up in political ties and scandals. He was basically an outsider and it reassured people that he was the better alternative than to Hillary, who's very similar to most past presidents with her political experience. However, the negatives of this are that it causes tension. Also, for people who didn't vote for Trump or believed in how the Obama Administration was run, they immediately are upset by the president and could already be at a loss for hope and expect nothing good out of his presidency, The parties in this election were extremely divided, and a little compromise especially in this speech could have been helpful.
ReplyDelete2) For constituent voters, Trump's speech was effective and remained true to his most important issues during the campaign: making jobs come back to America, building a larger military and changing the nation with a different kind of leader. With independent voters, Trump's talk of education and helping infrastructure was most valued. The only thing said by Trump that would appeal to opposition was a mention of helping the middle class. This was a big part of Hillary's campaign and obviously Trump was trying to unite both parties by saying this.
3) I believe Trump gave a good speech. Regardless of the fact if you like him or not, he knew his policies were enough to get the American vote. He is obviously going to focus on these as he knows they are his strength and what the majority of the people want for America. Also, by mentioning the issues Independents and Democrats wanted heard he shows a care for working with the opposition and trying to unite the country. Furthermore his continued mention of how he is a different candidate and will be changing how Washington is run reassured people watching his speech. Obviously there are things wrong in this country and repeating his plan and offering his alternative solution as a president was effective in my opinion.
1.) Trump calling out the ¨Washington Establishment¨ had both positive and negative side effects. On the positive side, Trump gained much satisfaction out of people by addressing the problem of corrupt politicians controlling Congress. He acknowledged the anger that many Americans currently have, and have had for a long time prior, with their lack of a voice in governmental decisions. Although he may have brightened the moods of many Americans who feel insignificant, Trump may have hurt himself badly with these comments against the ¨Washington Establishment¨ behind the scenes. Now that Trump bad talked the workings of Congress, those same corrupt politicians that constantly get their way will make Trump´s life even harder whenever he tries to take governmental action. He may have already hurt his relations with many of Washington´s most powerful players as a result of his comments.
ReplyDelete2.) The appeal to constituency in Trump´s speech was extremely strong. His consistent talk about patriotism and denouncement of racial divisions, as well as his attack of the ¨Washington Establishment¨ most likely swayed the attitudes of many independents into liking Trump. He also talked for a while about his promises to bring jobs back to the American workplace, and clearly showed his disliking in the foreign markets. Trump attempted to appeal to all American citizens in his speech, regardless of social class, race, or religion, and did a good job of this.
3.) When viewing Trump´s speech, it can be said that his address was indeed successful. He got his main points across quite clearly, appealed to all Americans, and delivered it with a very patriotic/unifying tone. Compared to speeches delivered by past presidents, however, Trump probably could have shown a bit more enthusiasm with his voice, instead of being so mono toned the entire time. Additionally, Trump could have integrated higher level vocabulary, making him sound more intellectual.
1. By calling out the "Washington Establishment", Trump stayed true to the message that he championed throughout his campaign. The american people aren't reaping the same benefits that the politicians are and how the power needs to be back in the hands of the people instead of a select few. At the same time, he wants to give hope to his supporters who haven't liked the last 8 years under the Obama administration and want a new hope looking towards the future. On the other hand, by calling out the establishment, he is furthering himself from those people he will be closely working with in the near future. Some politicians could greatly believe that their service in Congress was successful and that they were truly helping the people and feel undermined by Trump's comments. Also, it seems to create ill feelings towards previous President's that some people may have thought to be largely successful.
ReplyDelete2. Trump's constituency is most likely pleased with the part of his speech in which he addressed the forgotten American men and women and how they would be taken care of in the near future. He addresses their importance and their vital role they played in the election. Also, his promise of greatly strengthening our borders as well as bringing jobs back to America are all points he placed great emphasis on throughout his campaign. Lastly, he talks about how previous presidents have placed a lot of focus and resources towards helping other countries and he wants to make sure that in the future, the U.S. is being taken care of first and is the number one priority.
I believe Independent voters are most pleased with the part of Trump's speech in which he said that we would rebuild our infrastructure. His talk about improving roads, bridges, tunnels, highways and airports is beneficial to all Americans, no matter which party.
I believe that the opposition party could support President Trump's stance against ISIS. He wants to wants to completely eradicate them of the face of the earth and make sure that Americans are safe. The safety of the American people should be something that all Americans can agree on.
3. Based on the video, Trump's speech was mediocre. His attempt at unifying the country was sprinkled throughout his speech but he didn't specifically mention any groups (LGBTQ, Women, Immigrants) who feel directly threatened by his Presidency. In terms of principle, President Trump emphasizes the fact that he wants the U.S. to be the number one priority of the nation and that other all others come second. Examples include his remarks on other presidents helping other nations, strengthening our borders, and bringing jobs back to Americans. I feel like, for the most part, he stayed away from talking about specific policy like he did during his campaign. Finally, he did seem to affirm the limits of power towards the beginning of his speech when he talked about how the power was going to be going back to the American people.
Personally, I think that Trump gave a pretty effective speech. It was relatively short and he was clear in what his plans for the country were. He did attempt to speak on behalf of all Americans, even after such a divisive election. After his behavior in the campaigns, many believed his inaugural address would be poorly presented and seemed to set a low standard but I think that many believed his speech was better than they expected.
I agree with you that Trump did stay true to his message. He always said he wanted to bring about change, and by criticizing the Washington Establishment, he declared what his supporters have been complaining about, corruption. I also agree that his speech was generally effective.
DeleteTrump calling out the “Washington Establishment” in his first speech as president both helps and hurts him. There are many supporters who have either come to his inauguration or are watching it who are looking for something new, a change in the direction of our current government. By pointing out the negatives of the government and declaring its people selfish, only working for their own benefits instead of the people, it allows the people a chance to direct their anger toward something, Washington. He used the fact that he was an “outsider” to the political world to prove that he will bring about change. However, the negative side to verbally degrading the government could be potentially separating or nation even more. His speech has angered many supporters of the Washington establishment and those who have worked for it. He accused them of corruption. Criticizing the government also wouldn’t bode well with Congress, causing a rift to form between the two branches.
ReplyDeleteA large portion of Trump’s speech was aimed at his constituents. He heavily emphasized patriotism and change. Besides calling out Washington, he promised the people that he would lead America to a future where our infrastructure, military and industry is back at the top. He declares that he will stop enriching foreign countries and defending others at the expense of ourselves. Repetition of “we will” throughout the speech shows his confidence and determination to change the US for the better. Where he appeals to the independent voters would be at the beginning and end, when he mentions the peaceful transition of power, thanks the previous presidents, declares a nation only living as long as it strives, and that “no challenge can match the heart and fight and spirit of America”. For the people who oppose him, at the end, he mentions that “night sky” that can be viewed from people all over the country, bringing everyone together as one. From west to east, he calls for allegiance to this nation and together he asks for everyone’s help for a brighter future.
The video states that an effective inaugural address should unify the country, announce guiding principles and affirm the limits of power. In Trump’s speech, he most definitely gets the point across that he’s entering the office as the president of the people. Many times throughout, he rallies the people, calling for their allegiance and their trust in him to improve our current conditions. He makes his speech memorable and heal a divided electorate through repetition of “we will” to enforce his claims and show his confidence. An inaugural should also announce principles that will guide the presidency. Trump does just that by declaring his move to improve infrastructure, military and economy. He promises to unite the world and eradicate Radical Islamic Terrorism. He claims at the base of all politics is complete allegiance to America. He then affirms the limits of power, stating no one is above the law. He brings himself to the level of the American people by using the nation of everyone living under one night sky, filling their hearts with dreams, equally enjoying their freedoms and breathing the same air. He states that it’s the people’s voices that will define the American destiny.
I agree with your second point in that the majority of his speech was focused on his constituents, like when he talked about creating more jobs for the American people. I also feel he only briefly tried to appeal to independent and opposition voters.
Delete1) There are many positives and negatives to Trump calling out the "Washington Establishment" in his inaugural address. By doing this, Trump is showing his supporters that he does not plan on going back on the promises he made. A lot of people voted for Trump because they were not being properly represented or supported by the politicians that came before him, and therefore wanted to see if a different style of governing would improve their lives and end political corruption. When Trump said he wanted to transfer power from Washington and give it back to the people, he is ensuring the people that voted for him that he will do his best to distribute the rewards of government outside of Washington and into the rest of the country. However, by calling out the "Washington Establishment," Trump metaphorically declared war on the government and all of the people who supported the way government was run under past presidents like Obama. By doing this, he is creating even more of a divide between the country when he should be trying to unite it.
ReplyDelete2)Trump's promises to unleash economic growth in America and create 25 million new jobs definitely appeal to his constituency. His promises to make defeating ISIS his highest priority and improve infrastructure appeal to independent voters. Lastly, Trump's pledge to boost the middle class appeal to opposition voters.
3) This video stresses that a president's first words to the country should act to unify it, share guiding principles, and state the limits of power. Based on this and the rest of the video, Trump gave a fairly poor inaugural speech. His statements were more specific than they should have been, and he in no way stressed that he would not misuse his power in a way that will hurt people that do not agree with his ideals. While this is certainly the most inclusive speech he has given, I do not believe it was enough to truly unify the country, especially after witnessing his actions during his first few days as president. The video mentioned that the deciding factor for a successful inaugural speech is the presidency that follows, and his acts as president so far in no way reflect a successful and memorable inaugural speech that truly united the United States.
I agree with your third point, that his speech was not enough to successfully unify the country. I also agree that Trump's failure to establish that he, along with the corrupt politicians he attacked, would not misuse his power did not follow the rule of stating the limits of power stated in the video
Delete1. Calling out the "Washington Establishment" both positively and negatively impacted his speech. It was good for his speech because it´s appealing to a lot of Americans who feel like the only voices that are heard are those of politicians, and not theirs, as he promised that they would once again have power and a say like how it´s supposed to be. However, it negatively impacted his speech because he is attacking the people he will now be working with, which can ultimately cause some people to resist cooperating with him.
ReplyDelete2. Trump appealed to his constituency by promising to put America first instead of other nations, protecting our borders, and bringing back jobs to the American people. He appealed to independent voters when he promised the American people that he will bring the power back to them, and also when he spoke of bringing back jobs and improving infrastructure. Finally, he appealed to opposition voters by speaking of need to improve education.
3. Based on the guidelines, I think Trump gave a fairly good speech. He successfully unified the country in several parts of his speech, as he included promises that would appeal to all voters and made sure to address all Americans and not only a select few, and promising them all that power would be handed back to them. He didn´t exactly do well with introducing principles and not policies. To me, it seemed like he kept switching between them. As for affirming the limitations of power, I personally feel like he somewhat failed to do that too. This is because of how he seemed to be confident that his presidency would hand power right back to the people, while calling out the Washington Establishment that share federal powers with him. Yet at the same time, he was all about giving power to the people as it´s supposed to be, so that also affirmed it at the same time.
1.In his first speech as president, Donald Trump called out the "Washington Establishment". This in many ways is beneficial to him because it shows he is continuing with the attitude he portrayed while he campaigned. This also provides Americans with the sense of change and ending of corruption Trump promised before he was elected. On the other hand, calling out the "Washington Establishment" could possibly form a divide between the president and politicians he is accusing. This could result in the inability to cooperate and work together to pass legislation and make change.
ReplyDelete2.Most of Trump's speech appealed to his constituency. He campaigned a majority of the points he made in his speech such as bringing jobs back to America and strengthening the military. His promise to revitalize infrastructure and his emphasis on unifying the country with patriotism appealed most to the independent voters. He also mentioned the problems of the education system and crime rates in America which could also appeal to independent voters. There weren't many points that appealed to opposition voters specifically, but Trump's promise to help the middle class was something Clinton campaigned heavily which could appeal to the opposition voters.
3.Trump's inaugural address accomplished the criteria presented in the video. He did focus on trying to unify the country in his speech and he also focused on principles without turning them into policy as one would in a campaign. He stated the limits of power in the beginning of the speech for the government, however I don't think he established it for himself as the president. He also kept the speech at a reasonable length while distancing himself from his campaign. He also used a large amount of "we"'s in his speech instead of "I"'s. It was a successful speech, however, not memorable because he mainly listed the problems of the country and I don't think his speech was as eloquent as well known addresses such as Kennedy's of FDR's.
1) By calling out the "Washington Establishment" has many positives and negatives. Some of the positives that can be made by calling out the "Washington Establishment" is that it supports many Americans that feel that it is the establishment has done a poor job running the government. Many believe that the government is corrupt and that an outsider like Trump can fix the government. Many are tired of politicians and think Trump could make a difference. While one of the negatives of the call out would be that he attacked the people he will be working with for the next four years. This could affect how people within the government would work with Trump, meaning that since he attacked the people he will be working with, they might not want to cooperate with him.
ReplyDelete2) Trump speech can be seen as a speech that can appeal to his constituency, opposition, and independent voters. It can be seen as a speech for his constituency because his speech almost parallels speeches that he has given during his campaign. These speeches have a strong focus on the economy and bringing jobs back to America which people have supported Trump on this belief. Independents would like the part of the speech where Trump states that he will increase infrastructure. This included the building or roads, bridges, and tunnels etc.. It appeals to the opposition because Trumps had a common theme of bringing America back to together and that the government belong to the people.
3) Base on the three points of a good inaugural address of unifying the country, announcing guiding principles, and affirming the limits of power, in my opinion Trump has done all of those points but his speech has been affected negatively due to its flaws. The Speech does a good job of the idea that the government's power belongs to the people. He states his goals for his presidential term and his idea to create more jobs for Americans. But by doing this he also creates enemies. The speech then put the blame on the government itself, blaming the establishment that he will have to work with for the next four years. By creating enemies with the government itself makes politicians not eager to work with the president. This makes making policies difficult. In my eyes this flaw makes it difficult to say that the speech was good.
1) In his first speech as president, Donald Trump calls out the Washington establishment. By doing this Trump is able to appeal to the average citizen by saying how he is not like any other politician, and that he will do whats best for the citizens and not whats best for himself. Although it may have seemed positive, by calling out the "washington establishment", Trump may lose support of those very people that make up this so called "Washington Establishment" which could bring out future difficulties as president.
ReplyDelete2)During his inauguration speech, Donald Trump appealed to his constituents by making this speech much like his campaign. He did this by calling out the "Washington Establishment", by emphasizing the point that we have been helping other countries while our countries infrastructure and military have slowly been depleting, as well as his belief in safer borders.
Trump appealed to both his opposition, and independent voters by speaking about different broad topics that not many people could oppose to for example,Trump speaks of more jobs, nationwide unity, ending violence, and equality. He is able to do this with his many references to the bible. Also line like "when America is united, America is unstoppable" are lines that are used to bring everyone together as one country.
3) Based on the video, I believe Trump had a very successful speech. Trump was able to keep his speech from being too long, and he was direct and to the point. He did a good job uniting all of the people, by appealing to universal ideals, not just to the ideals of his constituents. One thing i believe he couldve done different, is that his speech seemed much like a campaign speech rather than a presidential speech, but all in all it was a good speech that united the country.
I agree with your third point I think it was wise of Trump to focus mainly on unification after such a divided election.
Delete
ReplyDelete1. Calling out the "Washington Establishment" has several positives and negatives sides. One positive side is that Americans who feel that that that the government is corrupted will be more at ease since there will be a person checking on corruption. However, a negative side to this is that it will be harder for Trump to work with the people whom he will openly call out. Some politicians altogether might not want to cooperate with him, which will make it difficult to compromise on certain future decisions.
2. By promising to raise more jobs for Americans, strengthen the military, and defeat terrorism, Trump in appealed to his constituency. These issues, along with improving education and infrastructure and uplifting the middle class, would appeal to Independent voters.
3. Based on the speech video, Trump's speech was not very effective. Trump spoke rather vaguely on his points, not offering specific insight on what he would do to help groups who feel threatened by him. Trump merely stated what he has in his past speeches of securing borders, promoting American exceptionalism, etc. However, Trump would like America to recognize its interests firsts, which I agree with to a certain degree. Even though America should focus on its interests before other nations, it should not target groups that would ruin relationships with other countries (such as Muslims). In order to fix certain issues, such as terrorism, Trump will need to work with other countries to figure out a solution together. I personally did not find his speech very noteworthy. He did not put any true emotion into what he said, and reiterated what he has said before.
I disagree with your third point, I feel that although his speech was brief, it was still very effective.
DeleteI respectfully disagree with your third point. I believe Trump followed suit of some of the greatest Presidential addresses in history by making an effort to ensure Americans that the nation is on the path to unity. Rather than spending time on discussing specifics, he makes sure all of his plans and future actions are transparent to the public. He also does a fantastic job of discussing the limits of power that government officials should possess and that he plans to act to make this a reality.
Delete1. Calling out the Washington Establishment had both negative and positive impacts. A positive impact would be that Trump is gaining more support from the people, as he wants to give them more power than they have previously had. This means that Trump is attempting to do everything he says, as a commitment to the American people. A negative impact would be the increase in enemies Trump will get. This means that he will likely have less politicians/congressmen on his side, since he just called them out in a bad way.
ReplyDelete2. Trump's entire speech would appeal to his constituency, especially when he mentioned how he would combat against terrorism, and protect the borders. Trump's idea to improve infrastructure and the middle class could appeal to independent voters and sway them one way or the other. Finally, Trump could have appealed to his opposition by calming down his tone a little, and mentioning how he will give power back to the people, and give them a greater say.
3. Based on the video, I believe that Trump's speech was effective and successful. Trump was able to unite the American people, and in a more mild attitude than before. Also, he was able to appeal to a larger group of people instead of one specific group, which is better for the country.
I disagree with your second point I think Trump effectively addressed his opposition with assurance that power has been restored to the hands of the people as opposed to the corrupt politicians of the Washington Establishment
DeleteTrumps calling out of the Washington establishment in his first speech as president is definitely a very aggressive move on his part. On the positive side, it is clear that he is trying to send a message to all of the citizens of the United States that he is going to do whatever he can to support them and achieve what the people want him to do. As well as that, he is also stating that he won't simply be following the normal standard. He will do everything that he thinks will best benefit this country.Although there were many positive impacts from trump calling out the establishment in his first speech, there were also negative impacts. Since President Trump is calling out the establishment so early in his presidency, he could lose the support of the powerful leaders in congress. Without these people's support, it will be very difficult for President Trump to accomplish all of the goals he had promised.Another negative effect of the president calling out the establishment is that it will leave a negative connotation that he is going to set out to change and destroy everything that Obama has created over the past 8 years.
ReplyDeleteTrumps speech appealed to constituent voters, independent voters, as well as oppositional voters. Trumps promise that he is going to bring jobs back the US by keeping US sold products in the US in terms of manufacturing and production. This appeals to constituent voters. Trumps promise that he is going to remove all of the prejudice and social injustice, as well as improving the size and quality of the middle class, appeals to all oppositional voters. Trumps promise on blocking of terrorism and getting grid of Isis as well as all terrorism in the US will appeal to the independent voters.
Based on the video, I don't believe that Trumps speech was very effective. Trump never fully spoke about what he was going to do. He was very vague in everything he said and the points that he had tried to make. As well as that he wasn't effective in the way that he almost attacked the Washington establishment. I personally think that trumps speech was ok. I think that it could have been better, had he been more specific on the major issues of his campaign, and had he not called out the way the government acted with Obama in office. I thought he did a vey good job on explaining to the people that he was going to put America first, and that we all live under a one united nation.
1. Calling out the Washington Establishment had some positives in that Trump assured the American people that they would be in control rather than the corrupt politicians that make up the "Washington Establishment". Some negatives of calling out the establishment may be the creating of enemies in politics as Trump portrays politicians as the bad guys that he must fix.
ReplyDelete2. Trump's speech appealed to a wide variety of people. For his constituents Trump discussed the strengthening of the American economy and the importance of putting America first when creating laws and making deals. Trump appealed to independent voters when he discussed defeating Isis and improving infrastructure as well creating jobs, all common goals between voters of different mindsets. The more general topics such as improving infrastructure and defeating Islamic terrorism can also appeal to Trump's opposition. Directed mainly at his opposition were the portions of Trump's speech where he focused on unity and and a peaceful transition of power, as well as the main theme of giving power to the people.
3. Based on the video Trump gave a good speech he included all three categories of successful inaugural speeches into his own inaugural address. Trump unified through the idea that we are all Americans and that America should come before the interests of other nations. He shared principles when he discussed improving infrastructure and ridding the world of radical Islamic terrorists. Overall I think Trump delivered an effective speech as he focused on the people and reuniting all under the idea that we are all Americans. The question is can President Trump truly follow through on the promises made in his inaugural address?
I agree with your second statement when Trump covered the importance of strengthening the American economy. He emphasized the importance of keeping jobs and large corporation in the United States. President Trump has the ability to reinforce such policies through tax breaks and a easier processes to establishing new businesses.
Delete1. There were both positive and negative aspects of trumps speech. one positive example is that trump wants to give the people power too and he assures them that he can fufill what they were promised. some negatie aspects is that talking about politicians in a bad way can hurt trump because he can make enemies and it could be hard for him to run in re election in four years from now.
ReplyDelete2. Trump explains how he is going to be able to give more americans jobs in the work force as well as helping benefit the economy. Trump also plans on working with the military so that they can defeat or weaken isis's power. I think that trump appealed to mostly independant voters and promises them what he has told them and hopefully he will have a successfull 100 first days. he focuses mainly on improving the nations economy as well as military power and terorism in general.
3. overall i beleive that trump gave a very good speech and that he talked about what really was needed to be said for America to hear from him. he gave his views on mostly fighting terorists and creating new jobs for the working class. I beleive that he can truly fufil his promises in his first 100 days in ofice. many people are still wondering though if he can make his ideas in to reality.
1) In calling out the "Washington Establishment" in his first speech he coveys that he is different than previous presidents in that he isn't a politician, which is why many people voted for him. People feel that politics is corrupt, and by voting from someone outside of Washington they hope to have a leader that better represents the will of the people. On the other hand, it could end up hurting him, because he has to work with politicians constantly. Many politicians might be insulted by this sentiment, making it harder to negotiate with them.
ReplyDelete2) Trump's constituents would definitely support the idea of bringing companies back from foreign countries and giving jobs to the American people. Independent voters would likely support Trump's plans to increase infrastructure and better the education system. On the other hand, Trump tried to appeal to the opposition when he spoke about racial equality. Many people were opposed to him on the grounds that they thought he was a racist, so he is clearly trying to prove to them that he is not.
3)Based on the video, Trump's speech was effective in that he was able to keep his speech brief. Also, he uses "we" instead of "I." However, I didn't personally think the speech was good, because I feel that Trump isn't a very eloquent speaker. It sounded too much like a campaign speech, rather than an inaugural address.
1. Calling out the Washington Establishment was a bold move, however this has never stopped trump previously. By doing such, he is able to appeal to the masses and his audience. People get the sense of justification and will be expecting great change in how some people believe is a corrupt and broken system. This is a very important move for him because as the popular vote portrayed, he was not the most favored. This idea however has the ability to backfire on him because he is essentially calling his future workplace. The people in Washington will not take kindly to this and would be less likely to agree with his opinions.
ReplyDelete2. Donald Trump was able to construct a successful speech during his inauguration. He is able to appeal to his constituency by maintaining some of his future goals and plans. The majority stem from his slogan “Make america great again” which has influenced millions to follow in his footsteps and his consideration of our military. Since the beginning of Trump's campaign, updating and improving the United States military in order to become a global respected force has always been high on his list. furthermore, the notion of increasing border security and later on building a wall appealed to his following. Throughout his speech, Trump successfully covers the area of job growth and creation. This appealed to the group of independents because keeping industry and production in the country would have the ability to benefit everyone. Moreover, throughout his speech he spoke strongly of unity. This most likely appealed to the opposite voters who might have voted from Mrs.Clinton because it shows his non discriminatory demeanor towards various races and religions.
3. Based on the Vox video, I believe President Trump gave a great speech. As Mrs. Jamieson portrays, the building blocks to a great speech need to cover the unify of the country, announce guiding principles, and affirm the limits of power. With the consistent use of the word “We”, Trump successfully instilled a sense of togetherness. This aided with the heal of divisions of political groups after such a controversial campaign. Furthermore, He repeated how the public would have strong political power. This would insure the people that in the future he will not overreach and miss use his great powers.
1. In his inauguration speech, Donald Trump called out the Washington elites, which garnered a mixed reaction. The positive aspects of this speech was that it reinforced his campaign promises of being an outsider and ending the political corruption in America. On the negative side, it could show that there will be a division between the executive and legislative branches of government, as he needs to work with the people that he calls out within the speech in order to make significant change within the government.
ReplyDelete2. Trump’s speech attempted to appeal to his constituents, the independent, and his opposition, but mostly his constituents. He continued to speak on how he plans to bring back jobs and end the division between Washington and the people, and how he plans on taking out ISIS and fixing foreign policy. His appeals to heal the racial tensions in our country and improve the economic opportunities for people were appeals to those that were not within Trump’s constituency, but he could have done more to prove his critics wrong, as many that were already opposed to him were not particularly swayed by the speech.
3. Trump’s speech was a moderate success. He didn't say anything that caused controversy and didn't bloat the speech with policy, mostly praising the people of the country that supported him and the strength of the nation despite its divisions. The speech was fairly short, and got his points across clearly, which is good, as not everyone would want to watch a long winded hour long speech, making his message get to more people. The speech could have gone much worse.
1. During Donald Trump´s inauguration speech, he had much to say regarding the Washington Elites. This created controversy and much conversation. On the positive side, Trump portrayed the significance of unity in our country in his speech. He is looking to simply ¨Make America Great Again" by inspiring our people, by no longer avoiding opportunities we fail to take advantage of and he intends of removing many things Americans are used to experiencing especially corruption. However, there could be many negative aspects to Donald Trump´s presidency and ideals. Some feel that him openly calling out was giving the wrong message. His intentions are to resolve issues but he needs to find a better approach. Instead of verbalizing it, make it happen!
ReplyDelete2.Donald Trump lives by wanting to ¨Make America Great Again." This phrase alone fuels his supporters because he speaks with conviction. A significant point Trump seems to always use is how he intends on bringing many jobs back to our people in our country. The economy is a big concern for him and he is looking to create a stronger and more efficient economic plan for us. Despite any comments made in the past, he claims he is going to take care of ALL people.
3. I do truly believe that overall his speech was genuine and he put a lot of passion into it. He focused heavily on our people and is promising many solutions to the problems we face everyday. Despite what people say, Donald Trump has faced much success throughout his life and his intentions are to help us encounter the same type of success. I expected a speech worse than this due to his lack of professionalism at times but I am pleased with his performance and hopeful for the future.
President Trump calling out the "White House Establishment" can be seen as a positive when looking at how corrupt Washington has been in the past. A prime example of this is lobbyists, something that President Trump said he would get rid of. Him saying this in his inaugural address is also something all citizens on the US can get behind. Nobody wants corruption. However in saying this he basically called out 535 of his coworkers saying they are corrupt.
ReplyDeleteIn his speech, President Trump tried to appeal to all types of Americans no matter which way they voted. For the constituent voters, he spoke about defunding foreign military affairs and creating more jobs for Americans. Independent voters may have felt more comfortable when President Trump spike about giving the power back to the people, nobody wants their voice to not be heard or be forgotten. Opposition voters may have felt better when Trump spoke about unity, that the nation is stronger together than divided.
Trump first speech as the President was a good one. He talked a lot about uniting the nation and saying "we are all Americans". He also gained points by complimenting President Obama on the smooth transition. While it may have been short, it covered the points needed to be covered, and thats what should be expected from a President, to get the job done.
1. In Donald Trump's Inauguration Speech he called out the "White House Establishment", having both positive and negative effects. Positively, he kept to the way he ran his campaign and appealed to the "silent majority", or the group who believed the government did not do enough and was too corrupt. By appealing to this group he raised hopes for an improved nation. However, this also had negative effects in that an Inauguration Speech is meant to bring unity back to the nation after two party's fought for control. Instead, Trump's speech focused on rebuilding America, to "make America great again". This also may make it harder for him to work with government officials, seeing as he has many times called them corrupt and lazy.
ReplyDelete2. Trump's speech appealed to constituency when he promised to put America first, and bring jobs back to America that were outsourced to other nations. Trump also appealed to the independent voters when talking about how he plans to defeat ISIS, a global crisis that all Americans can agree on, and how he wanted to create more jobs, thereby improving our economy. Finally, Trump's promise to give America back to the people appealed to oppositional voters as they would have a say.
3. Overall, I believe Trump's speech was successful in giving hope for a nation that is uncertain with him coming into the presidency, but moderately successful as an Inauguration Speech. I believe he should have spoken more about how America is already great and simply how much better he was going to make it be, as well as doing more to unite the parties. Although I believe he failed in that regard, his speech did reach out to all three groups of voters in some way, giving some sort of light for everyone. Further, his speech was more professional that those that he had given before it, making him seem more presidential than he had in the past.
1. "The White House Establishment" was "called out" by Donald Trump during his inauguration speech, which presented both positive and negatives.Trump continued to support the facets of his campaign by standing by the common Americans who believe the government does not do all they can in order to benefit the nation due to corruption, greed, and incompetence. This can excite the American people and bring a sense of positivity into the light. However, this can be seen as negative as it can widen the gap that exists throughout our nation, rather than unifying all citizens and the government. Trump may not appeal to government officials due to the attacks and warnings he has constantly sent their way.
ReplyDelete2. Trump appealed to constituency by claiming that he will make the people of America as well as America, as a nation, as the top priority. Trump mentioned two major issues that appeal to independent voters in his call to fight ISIS as well as his plan to produce and maintain American employment with the economy as a major priority. Ultimately, Trump promised to stick to his plan to "make America great again."
3. Trump's speech definitely succeeded in the aspect of promising the American people better lives, but as an Inauguration speech, he failed to unite the nation and be positive about all American facets of life. Although Trump failed to speak of unity and teamwork as a nation, I respect his realistic views as well as his promise and determination to attack such issues. His speech can appeal to almost any American despite his failure to mention the American dream and success of the past. He tends to mention the now and the future. Trump's speech did appear different than his past speeches as he remained on-target and professional.
Sean Wendelken
Delete1) During Trump’s inauguration speech, he called out the “White House Establishment” which was not a surprising move by him. Throughout his campaign he has boasted about how he will “make america great again” and fix everything that is wrong with our government. This is helpful for him because he is keeping his campaign promises. However, this can be perceived as insulting to not only the democrats but even republicans because he collectively blames a lot of the problems on politicians regardless of views. This can work against him when he can not reach agreements with Congress and they could refuse to work with him until he is out of office, causing a gridlock.
ReplyDelete2) Trump appeals to his supporters by reiterating his “Make America Great Again” slogan. He appeals to independents and opposing voters by listing out many promises and goals that he wishes to fulfill during his Presidency. This includes, improving infrastructure, defeating ISIS, and helping American families. He attempts to unify the nation considering he lost the popular vote.
3) This video explains the parameters of a good speech but I do not believe Trump provided a good speech. His inauguration speech was not very different from one of his many campaign speeches. He did keep it short but he could have steered away from his campaign tactics since he already won.
Donald Trump made a bold statement by calling out Washington D.C. early in his speech. He blamed Washington for keeping its wealth and protecting its politicians, while letting the rest of the country suffer. A positive effect of this statement is that he addressed a major problem in the country that he promised to fix. He took this problem and told the people that they have suffered and that he will help them. This creates the champion-like tone that a new president should have. He instilled anger into the crowd and uses it to his advantage. The negative to this approach is the negative tone that he conveys. He was a very unpopular candidate to begin with, so to blatantly attack the government in his first speech as president is a risky move. This could have portrayed him as a negative president who will make big changes too quickly.
ReplyDeleteDonald Trump’s speech appealed to most citizens, including his constituency, independents, and opposers. His promise to bring jobs back to the country and fix the illegal immigration issue appeal to his constituents. His promise to better the country by defeating ISIS, improving infrastructure, and uniting the country appeal to the independents and opposers as they improve everyone’s situation.
According to the video, Donald Trump gave a decent inaugural speech. He gave a speech with inclusive language and attempted to unite the country. He also announced his guiding principles that was be the main points of change seen throughout his presidency. However, he might have gone too far into policy rather than principles in this area. He did not affirm the limits of power. I believe Donald Trump gave a good speech. I especially like the uplifting part when he said, “We are one nation -- and their pain is our pain. Their dreams are our dreams; and their success will be our success. We share one heart, one home, and one glorious destiny. The oath of office I take today is an oath of allegiance to all Americans.” He outlines his main goals and how he will put America first. He highlights a bright future for the country.
Camryn Buonamassa
1. By calling out the Washington Establishment, Trump's speech is strengthened, but borders a dangerous line. The people of the United States most likely appreciate the reassurance that the dreaded corruption present in the government will be dealt with as he will "drain the swamp." He even announces a five year ban of executive branch official lobbying, proving he plans to take action in doing what he promises. However, Trump is to work with the very people he is calling out for corruption. This can complicate any future action he may plan to take as he must act and work alongside the politicians that he is somewhat threatening as he announces his initiative to eliminate government corruption.
ReplyDelete2. Trump easily appeals to his constituency as he discusses the promises he made during his campaign such as an increase in employment, the renegotiation and review of trade policies and agreements, the strengthening of the U.S. military, the construction of the wall along the Mexican border, and the attack on corruption in D.C.
Trump also appeals to independent voters as well as his opposition as he talks of improvements in education and crime. He makes sure to say that the government must work alongside law enforcement officials and also mentions a newly restored alliance with Israel. Trump announces a newly instituted program to aid immigrant-related crime victims too. He also makes an effort to emphasize the obvious issue that exists in American civil rights and even invites a passed Navy officer's widow to celebrate the success and bravery of the United States' forces and pay respect to a fallen hero on a national level. These all appeal to each American as they benefit the nation as a whole.
3. Based on the discussed characteristics of what a good Presidential address possesses, Trump's speech should definitely be classified as a good speech. Trump makes many attempts to ensure the people of America that the nation is on its way to unification by addressing his listeners with lines such as, "all members of Congress" and "calling upon both parties" while he consistently uses words like "we" and "us" rather than "I" or "me". Trump does a great job in avoiding discussing specifics and policy. Instead, Trump addresses each of the issues he plans to influence throughout his presidency while proposing subtle and agreeable ideas regarding such issues. Trump certainly discusses the limits of power that need to be reinstated in the government as he says he plans to "drain the swamp". A significant amount of time was spent on addressing the corruption present in government, but he does so by attempting to appeal to congress to better the nation in doing so. His speech was effective as it was kept rather brief, but made key points. Trump, surprisingly, does a great job of avoiding any facets of his campaign as he avoids using any terminology similar to his campaign slogans while entirely neglecting to mention any details of the campaign in general.