Rhetorical Devices In Obama's 2008 Speech

Four years after Obama’s election in 2008, the United States was still facing an economic crisis where the middle class was being hit the hardest. Although Obama’s 2008 platform won on the idea of helping the middle class, at the end of his first term, critics observed that he had not fulfilled his promise. By the start of the 2012 election campaign, both the Republican and Democratic party fought for the votes of the middle class. As Obama ran on a platform, focusing on grassroots organizations and moving “Forward”, Romney ran on a platform, of economic security and knowledge. Julian Castro, mayor of San Antonio at the time, was thus appointed the task of delivering a speech to convince the audience and American voters that four more years

He uses imagery to portray his grandmother as a symbol of the American Dream as he describes her strong work ethic and perseverance. He establishes her perseverance and character by explaining how she was always “barely scraping by, but still working hard to give my mother, her only child, a chance in life...” As Castro builds on his grandmother’s success story, the crowd builds onto their excitement as they feel a sense of national unity when Castro attributes his grandmother’s success to the virtue in the American Dream. However, Castro also employs negative anecdotes such as his mockery of Romney’s advice to a university in Ohio. He mimics Romney’s words, “Borrow money if you have to from your parents,” and then remarks, “Gee, why didn’t I think of that.” As the audience laughs, Castro’s boldness increases as he adds further commentary such as, “I think he’s a good guy. He just has no idea how good he’s had it.” Castro’s choice to pigeon-hole on this one comment Romney makes, shows his eagerness to defame Romney as a whole. He sways the crowd to base their entire evaluation of Romney’s economic plan on one comment, and as the audience gets caught up in laughter, Castro diverts their focus away from Romney’s character as a whole to the single

Castro repeatedly uses anaphora of the phrase, “It’s a choice between”, to emphasize the polarizing ends of the spectrum, Obama and Romney’s campaigns are on. However, as he presents the options to choose from, they become more and more outlandish. For instance, he says “It’s a choice between a politician who rewards companies that ship American jobs overseas ­­- or a leader who brings jobs back home.” It’s clear through his word choice here that he is already skewing the reader’s perception of Obama and Romney. He refers to Romney as a “politician” as he exaggerates Romney’s true message which ironically is the opposite of what Castro says it to be and is to spur American growth by focusing on domestic products and jobs. He then refers to Obama as a “leader” and ignores the empirical realities of Obama’s failed economic plan as he continues to bolster Obama’s capabilities as a leader. Furthermore, Castro uses pathos to highlight that the correct choice is Obama as he uses conduplicatio with the word “choice” four times in the tenth paragraph. He uses false dilemmas to make the listener think that the obvious choice is Romney, despite misrepresenting Romney and Obama’s true beliefs, and omitting other options that the listener may truly have and specifying down to a binary of two extremely different