Part I Pre-Election
While watching the first presidential debate of the 2012 election, I decided it would be interesting to visually analyze both Mitt Romney and Barack Obama while they debated. Clearly the subject matter is more important than the visual cues, in this case, but humans are extremely social beings and we rely a lot, especially in American culture, on the media and all the visual aspects associated. Plus, I’m sure both Obama and Romney have been extensively trained on public speaking, so analyzing their visual cues might lend a deeper insight on their political campaigns and future ideals.
I remember reading different psychology texts about James Borg, famed for his abilities to “read” people purely off the physical signals they unconsciously sent out while communicating, that concluded humans, while communicating, rely on physical cues at an astonishing 93% and verbal cues for the remaining 7% to understand what someone is saying or feeling. That ratio doesn’t change because of a television set, as long as viewers can see both Obama and Romney’s upper bodies while they talk, viewers will still rely mainly on physical cues to better understand each politician. They might watch for hand signals, eyebrow twitching, mouth movement, eye orientation, overall calmness or anxiety from body twitching, and the list goes on. All this to say, we never really think twice about any of these things, but they are vital components to our overall judgment of both of the politian’s character.
This concept of delivery is really the focal point, in terms of rhetoric, that I’m aiming on both Obama and Romney. Obviously, the way in which a politian debates should not be the sole reasoning behind any vote, but in today’s society a sizeable fraction of American voters could be swayed by a convincing debate.
Mitt Romney from the start was the aggressor; from 9:40 to 12:37 (in the video below) Romney launches his opening attacks on Obama. Which is understandable, it’s a debate. What I found intriguing was that for the duration of Romney’s opening debate he focused on looking at Obama, and never really looked at the moderator or the camera until he was eventually cutoff. Almost as a father lectures their children after they’ve gotten in trouble.
Like a lion stalking its prey, Romney never breaks eye contact with Obama. Admittedly, it does help drive home Romney’s points, and to this extent it gives Romney a strong platform to build the rest of his arguments off of. He comes off as driven, intelligent, and more important he works at showing Americans that he’s serious. In regards to Aristotle’s concept of delivery, this fits right into the idea of establishing ethos and appealing through pathos.
Both Obama and Romney display how different kinds of hand gestures can help demonstrate different points. From about 0:20 till around 5:30 in the above video both Romney and Obama use a plethora of different hand gestures:
-0:44 – Romney points his finger while describing debt being passed down generations (interestingly he points right at Obama).
-0:56 – Romney uses three fingers to illustrate the different ways to cut a deficit, he follows that up with using quite a few different hand gestures to explain his theory. No matter what Romney was explaining, right or wrong, it would be hard to differ with him because his hand gestures are so convincing.
-3:54 – Obama discusses a deficit reduction plan and uses his hands to figuratively show a 4 trillion dollar sum of money, which makes the number a little more conceivable to viewers. Then he follows up with laying out his website that depicts his deficit reduction plan by making gestures that point out the simplicity of his site and its easy accessibility.
For the majority of the debate, Romney seemed to be more energetic with his hand gestures, which translated into more energetic ideas. I’m almost positive he planned on presenting himself as energetic, because Obama, who seemed more laid back, did not seem as lively when describing his ideas. This may not seem important, but if it sways just one voter than it was worth the politian’s effort.
Similar to the first video, Romney’s glare persists. The vast majority of Romney’s allotted time was spent looking right at Obama, as if the election had become personal to Romney, and Obama was his sworn enemy.
Throughout the third video (above) while Obama uses his allotted time to speak, he chose to “speak” to the audience/moderator, he only glimpsed at Romney when he referred to him. Similar to the first two videos, when Romney spoke he focused on Obama. A growing trend became clear, whenever Romney spoke to Obama, Obama inevitably looked down at his podium. Examples in first video – 9:46, 15:16, 15:31, 23:21 second video – 6:03, 6:48, 11:33, 12:38 third -- 4:24, 6:25 forth – 6:20, 6:50, 10:45, 13:00 fifth – 1:37, 9:27. Compared to Romney, who barely ever looked down, Obama appeared to be either disgusted by Romney’s face, uninterested, bored, or just inferior. Neither of which are desirable traits, especially for a possible future president.
Videos four and five, shown above respectively, continue the trend of Obama looking down and Romney looking Obama square in the face. I’ve learned through interviewing that when a person looks down it generally means the person is not very confident. While on the other hand Romney almost never looks down, and when he is speaking he seems to be always looking right at Obama. Paired with that, Romney’s energetic hand gestures, and authoritative voice presents a politian who appears to be in the presidential race for the betterment of the American people, which is ideal for any presidential candidate.
These aspects of delivery are playing huge, unseen, roles in our current presidential election. The majority of voters will vote along political lines, no matter how any presidential debate goes. But, to those swing voters; these debates could be the deciding factor. Even in modern-day 2012, ideas and concepts derived from Aristotle’s time period on rhetoric can be applied today.
On a side note, if the roles were reversed, and Obama was the strong energetic candidate that kept looking Romney square in the eyes, and Romney always looked down and seemed uninterested, but they said the exact same things as the original debate, would the general consensus of the “winner” have shifted in Obama’s favor? And if hypothetically it would, than the true power of rhetoric could be seen, because then purely based on visual appearances, any well trained debater could win a large variety of debates.
Part II Post-Election
Now that Barack Obama has won and Mitt Romney has lost the
2012 presidential election, I want to look back on the different rhetorical
strategies employed by both candidates and see if their different methods of
delivery worked for or against them. I also want to analyze post-election speeches
by both candidates and see if either their body language or delivery style have
changed because of the election results. If so, I will want to figure out to
what ends they are trying to angle these methods and possibly be able to make
some modest projections about each candidate’s goals for the future.
Looking at Obama’s acceptance speech (shown above) the first
thing that hits you is the size of the crowd, easily more than 1000, and of
course America’s red, white and blue are easily scene from every vantage point,
as if we would forget which country Obama was once more becoming president of.
In the middle of it all, is of course Obama accompanied by his wife and
children; they looked perfect, almost like actors in a movie. The scene was
set, the children looked nervous as millions of people across the world watched
them, watch them. As the Obama’s turned and waved at different parts of the crowd
they seemed like gods controlling people with the simple wave of their hands.
It was clear Obama and the democrats had won another election.
As the first lady and children exited, Obama looked back at
the crowd and began to clap as if to celebrate his re-election with the crowd,
he looked happy and finally relaxed. After a long period of applause, Obama
finally was able to speak. He started the whole speech of with thanking
everyone for the win and how “you” chose the right path, and that now “we” can succeed
and move on. While he says this, he scans the room well and often as he makes
it a point to seem like he is talking to every single one of us. Obama gets
right to it and starts by pumping up the crowd, “while our journey has been
long, we have picked ourselves up, we have fought our way back, and we know in
our hearts that, for the United States of America, the best is yet to come.”
Clearly this speech had been rehearsed and this stinger of a statement had some
work put into it, but the outcome is genuine and the result is an excited
America.
Around 5:30 in Obama’s acceptance speech he begins to
acknowledge his former opponent Mitt Romney and his family for all the
wonderful things they have done. He does
this with warm hand gestures and a genuine tone, he has class and he wants to
remind the public that even though they were basically enemies, they are now
friends and Obama states that he will use this friendship to make a better
America. Around 7:30 Obama makes a joke about his kids wanting another puppy,
or rather how they will not be getting another puppy which gets a good laugh
out of the audience. Throughout most of the speech Obama seems so confident and
driven, unlike the debate in the first section, where Obama spends the majority
of the time looking down, he now looks up and looks proud throughout the entire
speech. In terms of delivery Obama is coming across much more confident to the
audience. This confidence comes across visually to every American watching and
comforts them in their newly re-elected president.
Overall, Obama handled his re-election acceptance speech
like most presidents do, maturely. He thanked everyone, from his vice-president
to each and every voter. He was warm and charming and convinced his audience he
was the correct choice.
Similarly, Mitt Romney has a large crowd of adoring fans
that hang on his every word and get excited even when he just looks their way.
Like Obama’s speech, Romney has American apparel surrounding and even has three
American flags on both sides of him. It’s amusing how much both Politian’s use
the American flag without hesitation. Win or lose, both these politicians are
going to show their loyalty to America.
Unlike Obama, Romney chooses to not be accompanied by his
family at the beginning, he does reference his wife and kids and ultimately
they all walk out and join him after his shorter speech. This could either be
from the loss, or his really big family size, most likely he may not have found
it appropriate. It does look more professional, but it also looks depressing as
he is by himself and not accompanied by family to take care of him until the
end. I wonder if both political parties planned for the families to come out
when they did, and if they did different times as they did on purpose.
Romney starts of his speech with congratulating the
President and all his supporters on his victory, he keeps calm and does a good
job of reaching out to the whole audience. He does, however, seem to have lost
some enthusiasm and kick like he had in his debates. Obviously the loss was
difficult on him and sapped him of any enthusiasm, but he was able to come
across as gracious and a good sport.
As talked about in the section above, Romney was much more
aggressive and was driving for different answers. This was a completely
different story in his concession speech as he supported the President and
“prayed” for our country. He made it clear he was upset about not becoming
President, but he also made it clear he supports America regardless and will do
anything to better our country.
Both politicians handled their last individual speeches very
maturely; they made both their parties look good while also making themselves
look better. In the end, Romney knew he was fighting a huge uphill battle, most
re-elected presidents do get re-elected for their second term. Romney knew this
but still fought hard and honorably, it will be interesting to see if he makes
another run for the presidency at some point. Obviously, Obama was the victor
so it will be even more fascinating to see how Obama handles another term as
President.
Both Obama and Romney used rhetoric to help drive their election results; Obama’s helped him more, clearly, with the victory. Romney tried to angle himself, through the method of delivery, as a strong “rebound” from the last president, but America decided to give Barack Obama another chance to put our country on the right path. It will be fascinating to watch both these Politicians and see if their rhetorical methods of delivery help or hinder them down the road.
No comments:
Post a Comment