Election Politics and Rhetoric, held on Oct. 20, was the second
event in the Democracy in Action Speaker Series. It launched the
SLU populace into an evening devoted to political awareness. Hosted
by the Great Issues Committee, the hour long discourse lead by
Elisia Cohen, Ph.D., and Ken Warren, Ph.D., educated approximately
30 interested individuals on the relationship between rhetoric and
campaigns.

Cohen started off by giving background information on the
purpose and effects of political campaigns, as well as providing a
definition of rhetoric.

Cohen pointed out the variety of functions that campaigns serve,
including teaching, or accelerating political education, preaching,
sensitizing the public to candidates and activating the citizenry
to think about the broad aspects of democracy.

“Campaign never really fails unless it inspires silence,” said
Cohen.

Cohen said that political rhetoric is a “winnowing” of
information, and the three main types of campaign rhetoric are
acclaims, attacks, and character. Cohen used recent presidential
campaign ads to illustrate the different types of political
rhetoric. The ads she chose ranged from positive campaign
bolstering from each party, to outright attacks on the adversary’s
positions. Kerry’s “safer in the world, protected at home” ad, for
example, worked to reinforce his position, tear down Bush and
created a “down with the people” rapport for himself. The main aim
of campaign ads is to “select, reflect and deflect” on an
issue.

Warren furthered the argument, saying that in the United States,
the problem lies not in the mud-slinging tactics of the candidates
but with apathetic American voters.

A former pollster for Dick Gephardt, Warren offered a profusion
of statistics regarding voting public. He said that there is a 17
percent gap between the number of people who actually vote in
elections and those who claim they voted. Warren said that most
Americans “aren’t interested” in politics and are “consistently
ignorant,” on not only current political affairs, but also on
foundation of the American way: the Constitution.

Warren explained that a stock question in surveys is “Do you
believe in free speech” and people tend to answer positively.
However, 27 questions later, when asked, “Do you think a known
communist should be allowed to speak in a town square,” people
respond ‘hell no.’

Warren said that there are four basic types of election
commercials: “puff pieces,” where a candidate introduces his
family, ones that address issues and platforms, true negative ads
and false negative ads.

“True negative ads are less effective because they tell the
truth…which the public doesn’t respond to as well,” Warren
said.

The sessions ended with a very brief question and answer session
with the professors. Great Issue Committee Chair Joey Kneer said “I
was very impressed with the turnout and student response, and I
thought the professors did a good job explaining rhetoric and its
effect on our democracy.”