1. S. GRANT WRITING SAMPLE | STUMP SPEECH ANALYSIS 1
Ethnocentrism is strong just a year after the 9/11 terrorist attacks and one month before the
Congressional mid-term elections. Both candidates are maneuvering difficult political messages using emotional
appeals and cueing different information shortcuts to play up each party’s respective strengths. The Republican
is insisting that Iraq poses an imminent, mortal threat to national security to stimulate vigilance in the voters,
which will in turn encourage them to vote Republican. The Democrat is arguing that there is no serious threat
that would require the U.S. to invade Iraq and emphasizing issues like education and poverty, so that voters will
be most concerned with those domestic issues on which the Democratic party is seen as stronger.
In congressional elections, Republicans are running with a handicap because voters tend to view the
policy areas on which Republicans rate highest as more under the purview of the President, and associate
traditional Democratic strengths with the role of the legislature (Popkin 68). So in order to make the most
persuasive argument that the Republican is better suited for the seat in Congress, he must connect the job of a
legislator to the strengths of the Republican party image—foreign policy and national security—in the minds of
the voters. In order to do this the Republican must support the invasion of Iraq.
The Republican is targeting both emotional systems of his audience members and capitalizing on his
party’s image as strong on national security and defense “while delivering the message ‘vote for me.’” This well-
constructed argument begins by linking the growing nuclear threat posed by the “murderous tyrant” Saddam
Hussein to the past tragedies of 9/11 still fresh on the nation’s mind. This not only gets the audience members
thinking about their own mortality, but implies that Saddam is a future threat to every American’s safety. This
awakens anxious feelings in the audience and triggers a surveillance system response. When the response is
from an emotional system like this one, the people will process information more quickly and reason more
efficiently (Brader 2005 3).
However, while triggering fear can break voters out of party predispositions when they are reasoning, it
does not guarantee positive action (Brader 3). The Republican goes on to argue that national security requires
action, linking safety to the Republican position, and that failure to act would be tantamount to surrendering the
future safety of the United States, linking danger to the Democratic position. This discourages “immobility” and
“withdrawal,” two possible responses to fear (Brader 3). The Republican then cleverly couples fear with
enthusiasm to guide the audience to the desired conclusion. He assures that American is militarily capable of
combating threats, wherever they may be, and that the country he serves is the home of the brave, not the
fearful. This subtly but effectively leads the voter to conclude that the Republican is the better candidate.
He does not explicitly say that the Republican Party is better on foreign policy and national security, nor
does he say “vote for me,” because it is unnecessary. Telling people that there is an escalating mortal threat to
the United States ensures that security and foreign policy will supersede other issues like education and poverty
in importance when the people vote in the midterm election (Kam & Kinder 324-25). The enthusiasm marshaled
by the final section of the speech reinforces existing beliefs based on past experience that the Republicans are
better equipped to handle defense issues.

2. S. GRANT WRITING SAMPLE | STUMP SPEECH ANALYSIS 2
The Democratic candidate must deal with the other side of the same obstacle posed by views of
differing roles of the Executive and Legislative branches of government, and the role partisanship plays. The
United States is already engaged in the War in Afghanistan, and the reality of the 9/11 terrorist attacks are still
very fresh in the minds of the nation. A 2002 National Election Study found approval for President Bush’s
handling of foreign relations, the war on terror and his response to 9/11 ranged from 60-80% (Kam & Kinder
325). Republicans rate highly on these security issues with voters, and they are most often the decisive issues for
voters when electing a president. As commander-in-chief, national healer, and head of both state and
government, the War on Terror is the president’s war, and President Bush is a Republican (Kam & Kinder 325).
The Democrat must oppose the war and insist that Saddam Hussein does not pose an imminent mortal
threat to the United States, because according to a Michigan State University study, fear of future terrorist
attacks translates into support for President Bush (Glenn 7). National security would also supersede traditionally
Democratic issues as the most important to the voter when electing members of Congress.
To make this argument, the Democrat is appealing to the disposition system (Brader 390). He
acknowledges that Saddam Hussein is a terrible, violent dictator, because he cannot appear naïve or too casual
when speaking about national security. But he goes on to reframe the issue not of concern to the United States,
because while Saddam is a threat, he is not a threat to North Americans (Popkin 81). He dismisses the
Republican position as overly emotional, politically charged, and irrational. He concludes by listing the wars “we
willingly fight,”—the wars against poverty and lack of education, leading the audience to conclude that the sage
course of action would be to vote for the Democrat.
Both candidates’ positions are the only viable positions they could take given existing policy associations
with each party in which our divided government is rooted. The Republican appeal is emotional, utilizing the
reactions to fear and enthusiasm to persuade the audience to vote Republican, and the Democrat’s appeal is
rational and insists that there is no immediate danger posed by Iraq, because absent of an imminent threat to
national security, voters will base their votes on the issues they traditionally view as the role of Congress to
address, which is an implicit argument to vote for the Democrat.