Matching Items (22)
131757-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Political debates are essential. They are critical components of the democratic process. Debates in the United States of America encourage constructive discussion about the role of government, the actions of individuals in positions of authority, and the future of the nation. During the presidential debate, voters are given the opportunity

Political debates are essential. They are critical components of the democratic process. Debates in the United States of America encourage constructive discussion about the role of government, the actions of individuals in positions of authority, and the future of the nation. During the presidential debate, voters are given the opportunity to understand in detail candidates' platforms and where politicians stand on the hot-button issues of the time. Of course, what politicians say during debates is important. How important, then, is what the politicians do not say? Uncovering Covert Aspects of the Presidential Debate focuses on presidential candidates’ nonverbal communication tendencies, not actual words spoken, through an examination of a sample of presidential debates. Research contains the implementation of a focused analytical method with the objective of formulating a better understanding of how the general population forms perceptions about presidential candidates. Findings include interesting information about psychology, communication, and politics as well as a number of answers to the question of how nonverbal communication affects presidential debates. Politicians involved in the research are Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Mitt Romney. This research describes how these candidates behave and draws conclusions about trends in the body language of American politicians. No longer will the covert aspects of the presidential debate, which is viewed not only by millions of Americans but also by many individuals in other countries, remain a mystery. The truth behind what matters and what does not matter in the political debate has been established.
ContributorsGupta, Vishal (Author) / Herrera, Richard (Thesis director) / Hoekstra, Valerie (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2020-05
187745-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Presidents exercise influence over policy discussion and options in America by the frequency and language they use to describe the current conditions, the perceived problems, and the solutions. The ability for presidents to articulate problems and solutions assumes an underlying purpose exists. This study examines how presidents frame the policy

Presidents exercise influence over policy discussion and options in America by the frequency and language they use to describe the current conditions, the perceived problems, and the solutions. The ability for presidents to articulate problems and solutions assumes an underlying purpose exists. This study examines how presidents frame the policy discussion for education in America and how they describe the purpose of education in the public record: the benefit of education is for society (common good), or the benefit it to the student (private good). Then the study examines the extent to which those frames stay consistent or are variable within and between administrations. The study utilizes presidential issue framing and agenda-setting to examine historical documents in the Public Papers of the President archive to determine the articulated purpose using the framework proposed by David Labaree. This study focuses on three administrations of the most recent period of federalism in education policy in America, starting with Bill Clinton and ending with Barack Obama. The study found that President William Clinton used the purposes of Social Mobility and Social Efficiency most frequently, President George W. Bush used Social Efficiency – Public Good and Social Efficiency – Private Good most, and President Barack Obama used Social Efficiency – Public Good more than all other frames. All three presidents maintained relatively consistent use of their prominent frames throughout their administrations with some indication that slight shifts may occur. All three presidents had low utilization of the frame Democratic Equality, and all used the combined frame Social Efficiency the most. Some variation between the utilization of the second-level codes of Private Good and Public Good do exist between administrations. The prominence of the combined frame Social Efficiency across administrations may suggest a more crystalized definition for the purpose of K-12 education in America.
ContributorsBryant, Aaron C (Author) / Dorn, Sherman (Thesis advisor) / Herrera, Richard (Thesis advisor) / Judson, Eugene (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2023