Streff 1

Alexander Streff Dr. Erin Dietel-McLauglin WR 13300 5 October 2012 Obama vs. Romney: Rhetorical Edition Between now and the presidential election in November, millions of people will make a choice between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. Both candidates are battling for the spot as frontrunner going into the beginning of early voting. At the center of this massive race to the White House are two websites. Ever since the internet was invented, campaign websites have been a focal point of nearly every political campaign on both local and national levels. Campaign websites serve as the hub of the online communitys information source on the candidates having evolved from simply a place to display a nice campaign picture and your political platform into a place with enough information to scour through for days. After analyzing the content of both Barack Obama and Mitt Romneys websites, I discovered a vast array of rhetoric in every form imaginable. James Herrick defines rhetoric as the systematic study and intentional practice of effective symbolic expression (7). He goes on to give five qualifiers of rhetorical discourse: Planned, adapted to an audience, shaped by human motives, responsive to a situation, and persuasion seeking (7-8). By these definitions, the websites of Barack Obama and Mitt Romney more than qualify as a form of rhetorical discourse. The two different websites are different in many ways including overall style. However, the rhetorical strategies that they both use are eerily similar. Minus political messages and slight differences in methodologies, both candidates websites offer similar rhetorical appeals in hopes of being seen as the candidate of choice for all

Streff 2

Americans, not just their niche group of supporters. These similarities can be very strongly seen in the fundraising, photograph and community sections of the websites. On September 29th, 2012, I visited the websites of both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. Both websites greet their viewers with a page devoted solely to joining the campaign. In order to access the real site, one must press a skip this page button. Once in Mitt Romneys site, a large picture of vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan appears with an array of different directions to choose between to navigate the site. Strangely, on this day of access, Mitt Romneys photograph was not visible on the homepage.1 The page uses red, white and blue color schemes throughout in addition to color photos, evoking patriotic emotions in voters. Similarly, Obamas website shows a large picture of him standing at a podium with a large crowd in the background. More links accompany this photo in order to guide the viewer. Blue is the dominant color of the page with all the pictures being black and white except the main one, which is still edited using a color filter. The curious difference in layout is Obamas choice to include a long scrolling blog highlighting pictures taken by fans and stories on the campaign trail. Romneys website sticks to a traditional campaign website design. The differences essentially end here. Looking further reveals an incredible number of similarities, beginning with fundraising tactics. It is common knowledge that money is the fuel behind all campaigns in the country. More often than not, the candidate with the most financial support is the one who wins the election. Although much of the money comes from very large donations, politicians still value their small donations. These donors often visit the campaign websites to set up their contribution. On both of these websites, the candidates court these donors in incredibly creative ways. Let us take a look at how each campaign does this.

The current version of Mitt Romneys website now uses many pictures of the candidate himself.

Streff 3 Barack Obama is facing a new challenge of being outspent. In Obamas 2008 election, his bank account dwarfed his opponents by dramatic figures. This election cycle, the budgets are much closer. The homepage of Obamas website makes many different appeals to draw in donors. The main photo is accompanied by an invitation to donate. Immediately below this is a picture of the President with Bill Clinton and a raffle to meet them in person. Entry into this raffle required a fixed donation price in order to qualify. The Obama campaign found a strategy both to earn extra money and to make people very excited about donating, feeling as if they are receiving something in return. Obama had one more fundraising method on his homepage for this particular day alone. There was a one click donate button, making a five dollar donation as easy as one click of the mouse after a simple registration. This encourages frequent donations that make the donor feel as if they are giving little money, when in fact their figures are quickly adding up. Mitt Romneys website employs almost the exact same rhetorical strategies to fundraise as those on Obamas website. Multiple contests appear to encourage people to donate with the feeling that they are being rewarded. For only three dollars, it is possible to be entered in a raffle to have lunch with Paul Ryan or attend the first Presidential Debate. In a similar way to Barack Obamas, the Romney website has set up a one click donation system. The difference however is that a visitor can connect with other friends and compete for who can raise the most money, even further rewarding financial contributions. The two campaigns are each making a massive push to appeal to donors of all types. In the case of both websites, past contest winners were used to exemplify the fruits of donating. Exemplification such as this is very frequently used for rhetorical purposes in texts of all varieties (Wikibooks). In general, we see nearly identical strategies being used to attract money

Streff 4

by both the Obama and Romney campaigns. These fundraising techniques are merely the beginning of the similarities in rhetoric that we see on these two websites. As we move to the photo section of the websites, the similarities do not end. Photographs are arguably one of the most effective ways to get a feel for who a candidate is and see them in action. Exploring the photo sections of Barack Obama and Mitt Romneys websites unearths myriad campaign shots. These photos, which have obviously been hand chosen for dozens of reasons, reveal many rhetorical purposes amongst viewers. It is often said that a picture speaks a thousand words. Based on this, it makes sense why so many pictures are included in every cranny of the campaign websites. Barack Obama has an expansive photo gallery organized by events. Some events have hundreds of pictures shown. The photos for each event are displayed in a long scrolling page with a black background. It seems as if the President managed to get every desirable campaign picture imaginable at each individual event. He is shown speaking, smiling, laughing, shaking hands, hugging supporters and giving thumbs up all in one album. In addition to the photos of him, there are many of the audience. Carefully chosen, we find pictures of intent listeners, young supporters, old supporters, supporters of many different races and pretty much every other way that people can be categorized. When viewing the numerous event albums, we notice that the campaign emphasizes using the location in the name, likely hoping to connect with people in that region. It is clear that Obamas campaign is trying to make many appeals to be relatable and a strong push to prove him as identifiable with the masses. A look at Mitt Romneys pictures takes far less time that it does on his opponents website. It appears that the Romney campaign truly believes quality over quantity applies to picture selection, and in this case it is correct. We see excellent pictures of both Mitt Romney

Streff 5

and Paul Ryan in addition to enthusiastic fans. Among the pictures showcased are ones of fans of all races and ages, veterans and enormous crowds. It is hard to ignore the obvious efforts to make Paul Ryan a dominant figure in the campaign. He is shown at numerous events, speaking to large rallies as well as appearing on stage with his mother, likely with the hopes of appealing to elderly voters, specifically women. Furthermore, we see many candid photos of Mitt Romney. He can be seen listening to his iPod in his car, meeting voters at their homes, chatting with his wife and Paul Ryan on their RV and playing with his grandkids after his convention speech. After looking at Romneys photos, it is safe to assume that one of his primary goals is to appear relatable to every American and to buck the stereotype that he is only the candidate of the rich. Photo galleries are a major focal point of the campaign websites of both presidential candidates. The choices of pictures are used to appeal to both the ethos and pathos of voters. By showing the candidates in so many different settings, the campaigns hope to garner the emotional appeal of voters as well as credibility when they are shown taking the stage to discuss issues at hand (Wikibooks). The usage of pictures on these websites may differ, but the general purposes behind each photo chosen are the same. Both candidates have realized that in order to win this election more than any in history, every type of person matters. The realization of this fact is especially present in the community and group sections of the websites. A new concept in campaigning is dividing a large group of supporters into many small ones. This new style of appealing to voters has been brought into focus by a situation where every voter wants to know how each candidate will help him specifically. In Lloyd F. Bitzers The Rhetorical Situation, he argues that rhetoric is brought into existence by a situation. This further proves that the content of these websites is in fact rhetoric (1-2). This situation seems relatively new on such a large scale. As will be discussed, both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney

Streff 6

have over fifteen groups devoted to a specific focus in order to attract a plethora of new voters. These groups contain slight differences between the two campaigns but the general intentions hold firm. Barack Obamas page of groups is arranged in a grid of tiles with a color-coded group name accompanied by a faded black and white picture. These groups are designed so that everyone can find one or more to which they belong. There are groups to represent racial groups, religious groups, LGBT communities, occupations and age groups. Delving into these communities offers a visitor ways to learn to vote, read stories from similar people and join newsletters designed for your voting group. Visiting Mitt Romneys page of groups reveals a shockingly similar scene. The groups are almost identical in nature and number. The pictures however, more actively show Romneys connections to this group through speaking with them, appearing at their events or showing supporters in that group. These pictures are in full color and are very prominent. The groups are slightly different in that there is a group dedicated to Polish Americans even though these voters are quite few in number. Also, an LGBT group is not included, reasons for which are likely a source of controversy. Romney also has multiple groups that are dedicated to attracting those who generally lean towards the Democratic candidate. There is a former Obama supporter group as well as a group dedicated to educators, a group very outspoken in the support of Obama. Through these groups, Romney is once again making a clear bid to the candidate who can appeal to the masses. The tactic of using groups seems effective as they are emphasized dramatically on both websites. In addition to groups defined by the standards set above, there are also groups by state that offer help for new voters to register and provide information about nearby campaign events.

Streff 7 These specific groups line up with Herricks definition of rhetoric. One of his qualifiers is that a text is adapted to an audience (7). These groups are a perfect emulation of this as they seek to adapt their message to every group possible. While the appeals of each set of groups is the same, the reasons for doing so are different. Obama already draws votes from a large variety of people. In 2008 he drew an unprecedented number of minority voters compared to any other candidate in history. Losing these votes is likely a source of nightmare for the Obama camp. Romney on the other hand, is not expected to draw much support from these groups. His goal in making groups is to attract votes from Obama, claiming each as an unlikely vote. It is likely that Obama is desperately trying to retain these votes in his final push for a second term. All in all, these groups seek to do the same thing, attract voters of all kinds. Doing so, however, is for very different reasons. A first look at the campaign websites of Barack Obama and Mitt Romney does reveal that they are very different. Until a rhetorical analysis is conducted, they seem to be polar opposites. The layouts and color schemes are dramatically different. The politics presented in each platform offers a stark contrast to the other. The content of the homepages are different and offer different twists on issues. Ultimately, the differences end there. Analysis of both presidential campaign sites shows that both candidates are fighting for the same thing. The websites focus little on issues and more on everything else. They aim to garner support of the masses through rhetoric that appeals to the maximum number of individuals while working to strengthen their financial situations. For one candidate this appeal is to retain these votes, for the other to gain votes. This appeal is accomplished primarily appealing to a broad audience and attracting donors of all levels. At the end of the day, we have two candidates running for President of the United States. Both of them have the ability to appeal to

Streff 8

people from all walks of life. Both can amass an enormous sum of money to fund their campaigns. Ultimately, come November 6th, each one of us goes to the polls voting on the one thing that still separates the candidates: issues.

Streff 9

Works Cited "Barack Obama." Obama for America. Web. 29 Sept. 2012. <http://www.barackobama.com/>. Bitzer, Lloyd F. "The Rhetorical Situation." Philosophy & Rhetoric Jan. 1968: 1-14. JSTOR. Web. 30 Sept. 2012. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/40236733>. Herrick, James A. The History and Theory of Rhetoric: An Introduction. Boston: Allyn and Beacon, 2001. Print. "Mitt Romney for President | Mitt Romney for President of the United States of America in 2012." Mitt Romney for President. Web. 29 Sept. 2012. <http://www.mittromney.com/>. "Rhetoric and Composition/Rhetorical Analysis." - Wikibooks, Open Books for an Open World. Wikimedia. Web. 30 Sept. 2012. <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Rhetoric_and_Composition/Rhetorical_Analysis>.