Department of English
Bachelor Degree Project English Linguistics
Autumn 2020
Personal Deixis in the
2020 United States
Presidential Election
An Analysis of Joe Biden’s and Donald Trump’s
Political Speeches
Personal Deixis in the 2020
United States Presidential
Election
An Analysis of Joe Biden’s and Donald Trump’s Political Speeches Monika Wisniewska
Abstract
The present study aims to explore how deictic personal pronouns are used in political
speeches by the two American presidential candidates, Joe Biden and Donald Trump,
during the 2020 United States presidential election. Donald Trump’s usage of the personal
pronouns I, you, he/she, we and they is analysed and compared to Joe Biden’s usage of
the same personal pronouns. The study has shown that Joe Biden has a preference for the
first-person singular pronoun I while Donald Trump has a similar preference towards the
third-person plural pronoun they. Both candidates also use the pronoun we just as often,
however, Joe Biden’s we is mostly the universal we, referring to all Americans, while
Donald Trump’s we is mostly the royal we, referring to his government. This study shows
that the same deictic pronouns can be used to indicate inclusion and exclusion.
Keywords
Contents
1. Introduction ... 1
1.1 Background... 1
1.2 Aim and research questions ... 1
2. Methodology ... 2
2.1 Materials and method ... 2
2.2 Limitations ... 3
3. Theoretical background ... 3
4. Results ... 6
4.1 Quantitative analysis ... 6
4.2 Qualitative analysis ... 7
4.2.1 The usage of I and its varieties ...7
4.2.2 The usage of you and its varieties...9
4.2.3 The usage of he/she and its varieties ... 10
4.2.4 The usage of we and its varieties ... 10
4.2.5 The usage of they and its varieties ... 12
1. Introduction
1.1 BackgroundPolitical speeches have always been a big part of the American history, playing an
essential role in shaping one of the world’s first and most influential democratic systems
(Håkansson, 2012). Up to this day they are perceived as a key factor in establishing a
powerful base of voters needed for a successful presidential election. Political speeches
are especially appealing to linguists that aim to interpret their countless rhetorical
strategies in hopes to determine how the linguistic system is manipulated to achieve
specific political goals. In recent years this type of analysis has been a prominent area of
research undoubtedly due to the advancement of the biggest media of mass
communication until now: Internet (Beard, 2000). Since every political performance
nowadays is recorded and widely available on the World Wide Web, it has become easier
to investigate and evaluate what kind of linguistic strategies and devices are used by
politicians and just how compelling those are to the regular public in terms of persuasive
strategies (Chilton, 2008).
Political discourse analysis belongs to the field of theoretical discourse analysis, which is
defined as analysis of formal language in either school setting or in expert-novice
communication (Cummins, 2000). The study of political discourse is exceptionally
diverse as researchers struggle to single out the linguistic strategies of the greatest
importance in the given context, from general political oratory to more narrow studies of
specific rhetorical devices such as hyperbole. However, only a small number of studies
focus on the role of deixis which is described by Chilton as words “generated and
interpreted in relation to the situation in which the utterer(s) and interpreter(s) are
positioned” (2008, p. 56). In the political discourse context, the deictic pronouns (personal
pronouns in English) seem to play an especially important role in creating a feeling of
inclusion and exclusion as shown by i.a. Adetunji (2006), Hamdaoui (2016) and
Håkansson (2012). All the above-mentioned authors focus primarily on the use of the
pronoun “we” as an expression of belonging and “they” as an expression of rejection. The
pronoun “I”, on the other hand, is used to emphasize the speaker’s intent to be perceived
as an individual and not a part of a group, while the pronoun “you” can be used for either
creating a distance from the addressee, or more generally, when directing the speech to a
specific audience (Håkansson, 2012). The present research will hopefully provide a more
detailed perspective on comparative pronominal usage in political speeches.
1.2 Aim and research questions
Trump’s at Republican National Convention (RNC) in August 2020 and Joe Biden’s at
Democratic National Convention (DNC), also in August 2020. From a linguistic point of
view the choice of those two political opponents is the most compelling due to the specific
nature of the two-party system that has ruled the United States since the 1850s. In the
case of deixis, the reference point is always changeable, which makes it even more
significant in a comparative type of study, as the same rhetorical strategy can be analyzed
through two different standpoints. The present study’s focus is the qualitative analysis of
the deictic personal pronouns used by both presidential candidates, in hopes to detect how
the pronominal choices are used to influence the public. Additionally, the quantitative
differences in the use of personal pronouns will be briefly discussed.
In the present study, the following research questions will be answered:
1. How are the personal pronouns used in speeches by both presidential candidates?
2. Are there any differences in the use of personal pronouns by the two presidential
candidates?
2. Methodology
2.1 Materials and methodThe following study focuses on comparison of the usage of personal pronouns during the
presidential election in the United States of America in 2020. Consequently, one speech
from each candidate was chosen, based on similar situational and rhetorical context of
those speeches. Even though Donald Trump’s speech is noticeably longer, consisting of
6937 words, compared to Joe Biden’s speech, consisting of only 3343 words, it was ruled
to be largely irrelevant to the study as it focuses on how the deictic personal pronouns are
used, not how many times.
The research is predominantly based on qualitative methods, as different usages of
personal pronouns by the two presidential candidates are selected and contextually
analyzed in the given framework. The goal is to determine who the addressees are in
Biden’s and Trump’s speeches, as well as to establish both candidates’ preferred
pronominal usage. The results were therefore separated into five different categories: the
usage of I, the usage of you, the usage of he/she, the usage of we and the usage of they.
The most relevant examples are then selected, described and compared between both
speakers.
2020). The tool Find and Replace in Microsoft Word was used in counting the pronouns
to avoid possible manual errors
.2.2 Limitations
The most critical limitation of this study is the fact the 2020 US Presidential Election was
mostly conducted in the time of a worldwide pandemic. This caused cancellation, delay
and change of form of certain events, such as public rallies and public appearances. As
the present study’s aim was the analysis of the deictic personal pronouns used in the 2020
presidential election in general, the cancellation of many public events imposed certain
constraints. Biden’s first public appearance was on June 2 in Philadelphia, when he
delivered a rather emotional speech, concerning the death of George Floyd, a black man
murdered by a police officer in Minneapolis. Trump’s first appearance took place in
Oklahoma, during his public rally on June 20. The pandemic resulted then in uneven
campaign time and therefore uneven numbers of speeches delivered by both presidential
candidates, as well as the content of those speeches. While Biden’s focus was primarily
on the topic of racism after the Minneapolis incident, Trump’s agenda was criticizing the
unfair limitations of public gatherings in the midst of COVID19 outbreak. In the end,
only one speech of Biden and one speech of Trump were chosen, both performed at their
respective National Conventions in August, as both were performed at around the same
time and in the same context.
Another effect of the pandemic was the digitalization of the National Democratic
Convention that took place on the 21 of August. While the Republican National
Convention was held as scheduled, with a big audience present, Biden delivered his
speech in the form of videoconferencing. The different setting of both speeches could
therefore be included in the analysis, as the environment plays a big role in political
speeches (Chilton, 2008).
Another limitation is the number of words in both speeches. While Donald Trump’s
speech is 6937 words, Joe Biden’s is only a half of that, with 3343 words in total. The
percentage of pronouns used compared to the total of words used was then counted.
However, that does not eliminate the risk that the results may still be skewed.
Additionally, the fact that both speeches were pre-written and rehearsed cannot be
ignored, since it indicates the involvement of a third party: professional speechwriters
(Beard, 2000; Håkansson, 2012).
3. Theoretical background
person’s “you”, “here” could be someone’s “there”, etc. (Levinson, 2006). Hamdaoui
(2016) states therefore that deixis is one of the most noteworthy linguistic devices to study
in the context of pragmatics, as it provides the researcher with a context for the utterance,
and allows to precisely identify the speaker, the referent and other. Unsurprisingly,
politicians often take advantage of deixis in its many forms: personal (e.g. pronouns)
spatial (e.g. demonstratives like “this” and “that”) and temporal (e.g. verbal tenses). In
the English language personal deixis is expressed almost exclusively through personal
subject pronouns like I, you, we, etc. As deictic expressions take into account any personal
reference, as long as they are semantically and syntactically connected, even object
pronouns (me, him), possessive adjectives (my, your), possessive pronouns (mine, ours)
and reflexive pronouns (himself, herself) are considered deictic (De Fina, 1995).
Personal deixis can be regarded as the most interesting deictic expression to study for
many reasons. First and foremost, not all languages use pronouns in the same way as
English, which requires a subject to form coherent and grammatically correct sentences
(Levinson, 2006). Since the subject in English cannot be omitted, like for example in
Russian, Spanish or Polish, the number of nouns and personal pronouns is slightly higher,
noticeable and thus, more deliberate. The English political discourse can then be seen as
more straightforward in this context, as the presence of both the speaker and the referents,
as well as the relationship between them cannot be hidden (De Fina, 1995). For example,
an appropriate use of the pronoun we in the context of politics gives the hearers an explicit
indication of politicians’ attitude towards the group they want to identify themselves with,
as well as who they consider to be “the outsiders”. For this reason, political discourse is
heavily influenced by the manipulation of the pronominal system (Hamdaoui, 2012).
Below, the different personal pronouns are described in more detail. The previous
research by different authors is applied to construct a bigger framework.
The use of the deictic pronoun I and its varieties in political discourse is strongly
connected to authority (De Fina, 1995). According to Håkansson (2012), it allows
politicians to display their personal beliefs, personal responsibility and personal
engagement. While plural we is used to shift responsibility from the individual to the
group, I could be seen as an expression of wanting to take on the burden or making the
decision independently from, for example, the party or the government. However, the
pronoun I also carries also a negative connotation as the speaker can be perceived as
egocentric and distanced (Håkansson, 2012; Bramley, 2001).
The first-person plural pronoun we is mostly used to evoke a feeling of belonging and
identification with a certain group of people (De Fina, 1995). Unsurprisingly, it is also
the most used deictic pronoun in the context of political discourse as we is most
commonly used for persuasive purposes, shifting of responsibility from individual to a
group and creating a positive and inclusive connection between the speaker and his public
(Hamdaoui, 2015). Additionally, by using the deictic pronoun we, a distinction is instantly
made between us and them, so it could be argued that we has not only an inclusive purpose
but also an exclusive one (Levinson, 2006). In the present study a framework constructed
by Wodak et al. (2009) and adapted by Hamdaoui (2015) and Adentunji (2006) is applied,
concerning the different realizations of the pronoun we:
1. the universal we: applies to the current context and refers to the speaker and his public (both present and non-present)
2. the historical we: applies to both the speaker and his public in a wider, historical context, including those who have passed away
3. the royal we: applies to the speaker and his own, smaller group, for example the government
In political discourse the universal we contributes to creation of inclusion and unity with
your target group (for example Democrats or Republicans) while the historical we aims
at creating the same type of inclusion but with a larger group of people (for example all
Americans). The use of royal we is intended when a responsibility-shift is needed, for
example when hard political decisions are made, or to emphasize the speaker’s position
(Adentunji, 2006). In the context of Trump’s and Biden’s speeches all three categories
are of considerable interest.
The pronoun they is associated with a construction of an external group of people, not
present in the discourse itself (Bramley, 2001). Although not much research has been
done on the topic of they, it is one of the most fundamental pronouns used in political
discourse as it contributes to shaping an image of exclusion, division and categorization
when it is used as an opposite of we. In the present study, the use of they has been filtered
in regard to whether it is used deictically, meaning whether they refer to people and not
things, and if its meaning is widely understood by the public (they as our enemies)
(Håkansson, 2012; Bramley, 2001).
therefore the third-person pronouns are counted as deictic as long as they are clearly
exophoric.
4. Results
4.1 Quantitative analysis
The quantitative approach has shown that both candidates have a clear preference towards
using the pronoun we and its varieties. We stands for 43% of all deictic pronouns used by
Donald Trump and 40% of all deictic pronouns used by Joe Biden. He/she as well as you
are situated at a similar level (12% and 12% respectively in Joe Biden’s speech and 8%
and 14% respectively in Donald Trump’s speech). However, while Biden shows an
evident preferment of the personal pronoun I and its forms (27%), Trump shows similar
preferment towards they and its forms (21%).
The simplified version of the statistical occurrence of all personal pronouns (deictic and
not deictic) is presented below in Table 1. For a detailed version, with all the personal
pronouns and their forms (subject pronouns, object pronouns, possessive adjectives,
possessive pronouns and reflexive pronouns) listed, please see Appendix C. The
percentage ratio counted on the basis of the instances of all personal pronouns used per
all the words used is presented in Figure 1.
Table 1. The comparison of statistical occurrence of personal pronouns in speeches by Donald Trump and Joe Biden (raw numbers)
Personal pronoun and its forms
Trump Biden Total
Figure 1. The percentage ratio of statistical occurrence of personal pronouns in speeches by Donald Trump and Joe Biden
In the next section, an explanation and discussion for the patterns identified in the
quantitative analysis will be provided.
4.2 Qualitative analysis
4.2.1 The usage of I and its varieties 4.2.1.1 Biden
As mentioned above, Joe Biden shows a clear preference towards the use of the personal
pronoun I and its varieties compared to Donald Trump. I is mostly used to display his
personal beliefs and engagement (Håkansson, 2012) as in the examples below:
(1) As president, I will make you this promise: I will protect America. I will defend
us from every attack.
(2) Are we ready? I believe we are.
The authority of the speaker is apparent as he makes seemingly generous promises,
although without specifying what actions need to be taken to achieve those promises, like
in example (1) and (3) (De Fina, 1995). While personal beliefs are clear and apparent,
personal responsibility is however generally minimized in Biden’s speech. Instead, a
distinctive combination of the pronoun I and we is often used:
(4) If I’m president on day one, we’ll implement the national strategy I’ve been
laying out since March.
(5) In short, I will do what we should have done from the very beginning.
Both examples could be interpreted as a responsibility shift. In (4) the speaker insinuates
that implementation of a national strategy is not possible without the help of his
government, while in (5) a distance between him and the we is created as he points out
that changes should have been made a long time ago. That last utterance can be thus
perceived as derogatory and offensive by either the royal we: the government (who didn’t
implement the strategy), or universal we: the voters (who perhaps didn’t show interest
and thus didn’t take any action to implement the strategy) (Håkansson, 2012; Bramley,
2001).
4.2.1.2 Trump
The pronominal choices in Trump’s speech are quite similar, although a stronger
emphasis is put on authority, rather than beliefs and promises. This can be explained by
the fact that Donald Trump is not only a presidential candidate but also a current president
of the United States of America. The function of I in (6) is to show the speaker’s presence
as an individual who gave up on his personal agenda to fight for others. Example (7) is a
manifestation of strength and domination (De Fina, 1995).
(6) From the moment I left my former life behind — and it was a good life — I have
done nothing but fight for you.
(7) When I took bold action to issue a travel ban on China — very early indeed —
Joe called it hysterical and xenophobic.
Authority can also be observed in example (8) where the speaker paints a picture of
himself as the strong leader of the universal we.
(8) Four years ago, I ran for president because I cannot watch this betrayal of our
country any longer. I could not sit by as career politicians let other countries take
advantage of us on trade, borders, foreign policy and national defense.
4.2.2 The usage of you and its varieties 4.2.2.1 Biden
The generic pronoun you is used numerous times, like in examples (9) and (10). Since the
referent is general, it makes it easier for the hearer to place himself in the position of the
referent, like in (9) when relatability of similar experiences is present (Bramley, 2001).
Example (10) gives an instance of two widely generic pronouns that carry no specific
meaning or function. The phrase “you know” is used by Joe Biden six different times
throughout the speech, which could be interpreted as an expression of familiarity and
affection.
(9) I have some idea how it feels to lose someone you love. I know that deep black
hole that opens up in your chest. That you feel your whole being is sucked into
it.
(10)
You know, many people have heard me say this, but I have always
believed you can define America in one word: Possibilities.
(11)
Thank you, Mr. President. You were a great president.
(12)
And this is a battle that we will win, and we’ll do it together. I promise
you.
An example of a singular you is present in (11) when Biden talks directly to Barack
Obama. That corresponds with what Bramley (2001) has said about using the singular
you as a positive appraisal of your political ally. Example (12) can be seen as either a
generic or plural you.
4.2.2.2 Trump
Although Trump’s usage of you proportionally seems to position itself at the same level
as Biden’s (14% and 12% respectively), it is due to the fact that Trump uses the phrase
“Thank you” a staggering 26 times out of 90 instances of you in general. Trump seems to
also favor using singular and plural you over the generic you in comparison to Biden. In
(13) and (14) the you is used in reference to the voters, present and absent, while in (15)
it is used towards the members of the Border Patrol union, present at the location of the
event. The typically generic use of you can be observed in example (16).
(13)
Your vote will decide whether we protect law-abiding Americans or
whether we give free rein to violent anarchists and agitators and criminals who
threaten our citizens.
(14)
If the left gains power, they will demolish the suburbs, confiscate your
guns, and appoint justices who will wipe away your second amendment and
other constitutional freedoms.
(15)
Thank you, brave, brave people.
4.2.3 The usage of he/she and its varieties 4.2.3.1 Biden
While in the statistical count all personal pronouns are included, whether deictic or not,
this analysis will focus solely on the instances of when he and she should be considered
deictic, meaning that their referent is obvious in the given context (Rühlemann, 2019).
Example (17), although with an endophoric referent present, can be disputed to still be
deictic since even if the phrase “this president” was to be removed, it would still be clear
who the referent actually is. Example (18), on the other hand, is a clear exophoric
reference as he without a doubt refers to Donald Trump, but no name was mentioned
before or after the utterance. Most of the deictic and non-deictic uses of he in the speech
in fact refer to Donald Trump. She and its varieties are exclusively used non-deictically.
(17)
What we know about this president is if he’s given four more years, he
will be what he’s been the last four years.
(18)
With a health care system that lowers premiums, deductibles, and drug
prices by building on the Affordable Care Act he’s trying to rip away.
4.2.3.2 Trump
All of the instances of Trump’s usage of the third-person pronouns are endophoric and
therefore non-deictic. As many as 39 out of 44 instances of usage of the pronoun he refer
to Joe Biden, like in example (19).
(19)
Joe Biden is weak. He takes his marching orders from liberal hypocrites
who drive their cities into the ground while fleeing from the scene of the
wreckage.
4.2.4 The usage of we and its varieties 4.2.4.1 Biden
The first-person plural pronoun we and its varieties, is the preferable choice of pronoun
in Joe Biden’s speech and evidently used for persuasive purposes (Hamdaoui, 2012). All
three we categories can be found in the speech (Wodak et al., 2009; Hamdaoui, 2015;
Adentunji, 2006). The universal we, which stands for the immediate public, both present
and non-present, can be found in example (20). The pronoun is used for the purpose of
creating inclusiveness with the public. By saying “our kids” Biden clearly does not mean
that all the American kids are actually “our kids”, as the phrase is used figuratively.
Nevertheless, using “our”, instead of “your” implies shared responsibility of the “we” in
this context.
The historical we, used in example (21), stands for the Americans as a nation. This we is
particularly inclusive as it refers to not only the immediate public, not even to the
Democrats, but to the nation in a broad, historical context. The we is no longer only the
present generation, the we is the Americans that build this country, lived or are still living
in it.
(21)
You know, America’s history tells us that it has been in our darkest
moments that we’ve made our greatest progress. That we’ve found the light.
And in this dark moment, I believe we are poised to make great progress again.
That we can find the light once more.
The royal we in example (22) is used to refer to the government of the United States, as
well as the workers who produce medical supplies. It does not however imply any
responsibility shift, as suggested by Adentunji (2006), but rather a shared type of
responsibility between the president who can propose a change, the government who has
to implement it and the workers who need to do the physical part of production. The
responsibility shift from an individual to the group can be instead seen in example (5).
(22)
We’ll develop and deploy rapid tests with results available immediately.
We’ll make the medical supplies and protective equipment our country needs.
And we’ll make them here in America.
4.2.4.2 Trump
Similarly, Donald Trump also shows a clear preference towards the pronoun we, which
confirms that we is perceived as the most influential and persuasive in the context of
political discourse. In contrast to Biden, however, the speech contains significantly far
more instances of the royal we (25) than any other we category. This particular royal we
refers to the government and the Republican party. Scarce examples of the universal we
and the historical we are shown respectively in examples (23) and (24).
(23)
When the anarchists started ripping down our statues and monuments
right outside, I signed an order immediately, 10 years in prison, and it was a
miracle.
(24)
As one nation, we mourn, we grieve, and we hold in our hearts forever the
memories of all of those lives that have been so tragically taken so unnecessary.
(25)
But not only did we talk about it as a future site; we got it built.
4.2.5 The usage of they and its varieties 4.2.5.1 Biden
Out of all the instances of they in the speech, only one can be argued to be somewhat
deictic (26), as their in this context refers to a more general entity – they as all men and
women.
(26)
Endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.
The other instances of they have a clear endophoric reference or point to things and not
people.
4.2.5.2 Trump
The usage of they in Trump’s speech is more prominent and decisive, as the examples
(27), (28) and (29) show.
(27)
They pleaded with me to let China continue stealing our jobs, ripping us
off and robbing our country blind, but I kept my word to the American people.
(28)
They said that it would be impossible to replace NAFTA, but again they
were wrong.
(29)
They do not write about that. They don’t want to write about that. They
do not want you to know those things.
All the examples are also entirely deictic as the referent of they is never clearly specified
although widely understood. By creating “ghost-like” references, Trump has the ability
to create an image of us vs them, even though the public might not know exactly who
they are in a particular utterance (Bramley, 2001). The public is aware however that they
is the enemy.
5. Discussion
The aim of the study was the comparative analysis of the usage of deictic personal
pronouns in the speeches by Donald Trump and Joe Biden during the 2020 United States
Presidential Election. The following research questions are now to be analysed, on the
basis of the results shown above.
1. How are the personal pronouns used in speeches by both presidential candidates?
2. Are there any differences in the use of personal pronouns by the two presidential
candidates?
we while referring to the American people, regardless their party. Biden manipulates the
pronominal system to be seen as an American President, not a Democratic President. His
use of the pronoun I and its varieties can be considered as rather daring, since using
first-person singular pronoun can evoke strong, negative feelings of exclusiveness and
dominance (Håkansson, 2012; Bramley, 2001). On the other hand, usage of I in political
discourse can establish authority, decisiveness and leadership, perhaps needed in the
current situation of a worldwide pandemic that affected USA so severely. Through his
pronominal choices, Biden paints a picture of a leader who has not only strong beliefs but
also a plan. That plan however is only achievable through the cooperation of both the
universal we (all Americans) and the royal we (the government). In terms of the pronoun
you, Biden shows a clear preference towards the generic you, to build a personal
connection with his public (Bramley, 20001). The ambiguous pronouns she/he/they are
rarely used deictically in Biden’s speech. However, on the one instance when it is actually
deictic (18), Biden makes a very strong statement. By using the deictic he and thus
“censuring” the referent, Biden creates an image of “the other” – an enemy.
Donald Trump’s performance was also analysed through the lens of research question 1.
The pronominal choice of Trump is the pronoun we and its varieties. The royal we is used
most often as it refers to all the government’s and the Republican party’s achievements
in the past four years. They is the next preferred choice of pronoun – it is used deictically
a lot of times while referring to an unknown group, though heavily implied to be the
Democrats, the opposition or other enemies, both inside and outside the country. He and
she are not used deictically. The use of you should be treated very carefully in this study.
In contrast to Biden, Trump performed his speech “live”, with an actual audience present.
Therefore, the statistical use of you, that has shown to be 14% and thus almost equal to
Biden, places high due to the physical context of the situation, as Trump uses the phrase
“thank you” during and after the applause. The singular first-person pronoun I is used to
confirm an image of a strong leader, unafraid to take action against his political opponents
or even his own Party and other ally countries.
connection to another difference in the pronominal choices by the two candidates. Biden’s
usage of the pronoun I, although significantly higher, can be characterized as more
inclusive than Trump’s. The I in Biden’s speech is used mostly to convey his personal
beliefs and political stance, while the I in Trump’s speech is clearly imposing and
assertive, as he constantly accentuates the importance of his leadership. Similar process
can be observed in the usage of the we pronoun. Even though both candidates use roughly
the same amount of the plural first-person pronoun, it is clearly Biden that uses it more
inclusively, as the universal and the historical we are preferred over the royal we. The
frequent use of the royal we creates a feeling of exclusion in Trump’s speech as he chooses
not to identify himself with the voters, but rather with his own party.
In conclusion, the present work can be considered successful in bringing a new
perspective to the academic conversation of political discourse, as well as personal deixis.
Although studies conducted by Håkansson (2012), Hamdaoui (2016) and Adetunji (2006)
all cover a similar area – political speeches, the present study is exceptional in terms of
the applied framework. Whereas previous research on this topic has focused more on
solely identifying the referents in the political discourse (Håkansson, 2012) or politicians’
pronominal preference (Hamdaoui, 2016), this analysis has shown that a wider
perspective can be applied in terms of deixis. By compiling the approaches used by the
above-mentioned authors, as well as the general framework of pragmatics, it was proven
that a certain combination of pronouns, as well as different realizations of pronouns, have
a big effect on the message being conveyed. Taking into account the importance of
political speeches in the time of universal accessibility to the Internet, this discovery can
be used by other linguists, who analyse the different kinds of persuasive strategies, as
well as politicians and professional speechwriters for the purpose of “gaining and
exercising power in society” (Adetunji, 2006, p. 177).
6. Conclusion
The study has also shown that external factors, such as physical placement and means of
communication, play a big role in shaping political discourse. Additionally, for the data
to be more reliable, a larger sample should be analysed, as it was shown that the statistical
approach cannot display the more subtle differences in the usage of deictic personal
pronouns. Deixis should therefore always be considered in terms of qualitative research.
References
PrimaryBiden, J. (2020) 2020 Joe Biden’s full Democratic National Convention speech: 21
August 2020 [Transcript]. Retrieved from
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/21/joe-biden-dnc-speech-transcript.html
Trump, D. (2020) Full Transcript: President Trump’s Republican National Convention
Speech: 28 August 2020. [Transcript]. Retrieved from
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/28/us/politics/trump-rnc-speech-transcript.html
Secondary
Adetunji, A. (2006). Inclusion and Exclusion in Political Discourse: Deixis in Olusegun
Obasanjo's Speeches. Journal of Language and Linguistics, Volume 5, Number
2. Retrieved from
http://webspace.buckingham.ac.uk/kbernhardt/journal/5_2/LING%202.pdf
Bramley, N. R. (2001). Pronouns of Politics: The Use of Pronouns in the Construction
of “self” and “other” in Political Interviews. Australian National University.
Cummins, J. (2000). Language, Power and Pedagogy: Bilingual Children in the
Crossfire (23) (Bilingual Education & Bilingualism (23)). Multilingual Matters.
Chilton, P. (2003). Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice (1st ed.).
Routledge.
Cutting, J. (2014). Pragmatics: A Resource Book for Students (Routledge English
Language Introductions) (3rd ed.). Routledge.
de Fina, A. (1995). Pronominal choice, identity, and solidarity in political
discourse. Text - Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 15(3),
379–410. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1995.15.3.379
Hamdaoui, M. (2015). The persuasive power of person deixis in political discourse: The
pronoun “we” in Obama’s speeches about the 2007-2009 financial crises as an
example. European Conference on Arts &Humanities, Official Conference
Proceedings. Retrieved from
Håkansson, J. (2012). The Use of Personal Pronouns in Political Speeches : A
comparative study of the pronominal choices of two American presidents
(Dissertation). Retrieved from
http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-19502
Levinson, S. C. (2006). ‘Deixis and Pragmatics’ for Handbook of Pragmatics. In G.
Ward & L. Horn (Eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics (1st ed., pp. 54–96). Hoboken:
Wiley-Blackwell.
Mann, P. S. (2020). Introductory Statistics (9th ed.). Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.
Rühlemann, C. (2019). Corpus linguistics for pragmatics: A guide for research.
Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Appendix A – Biden
Good evening.Ella Baker, a giant of the civil rights movement, left us with this wisdom: Give people light and they will find a way.
Give people light.
Those are words for our time.
The current president has cloaked America in darkness for much too long. Too much anger. Too much fear. Too much division.
Here and now, I give you my word: If you entrust me with the presidency, I will draw on the best of us not the worst. I will be an ally of the light not of the darkness.
It’s time for us, for We the People, to come together.
For make no mistake. United we can, and will, overcome this season of darkness in America. We will choose hope over fear, facts over fiction, fairness over privilege.
I am a proud Democrat and I will be proud to carry the banner of our party into the general election. So, it is with great honor and humility that I accept this nomination for President of the United States of America.
But while I will be a Democratic candidate, I will be an American president. I will work as hard for those who didn’t support me as I will for those who did.
That’s the job of a president. To represent all of us, not just our base or our party. This is not a partisan moment. This must be an American moment.
It’s a moment that calls for hope and light and love. Hope for our futures, light to see our way forward, and love for one another.
America isn’t just a collection of clashing interests of Red States or Blue States. We’re so much bigger than that.
We’re so much better than that.
Nearly a century ago, Franklin Roosevelt pledged a New Deal in a time of massive unemployment, uncertainty, and fear.
And he did. And so can we.
This campaign isn’t just about winning votes.
It’s about winning the heart, and yes, the soul of America.
Winning it for the generous among us, not the selfish. Winning it for the workers who keep this country going, not just the privileged few at the top. Winning it for those communities who have known the injustice of the “knee on the neck”. For all the young people who have known only an America of rising inequity and shrinking opportunity.
They deserve to experience America’s promise in full.
No generation ever knows what history will ask of it. All we can ever know is whether we’ll be ready when that moment arrives.
And now history has delivered us to one of the most difficult moments America has ever faced. Four historic crises. All at the same time. A perfect storm.
The worst pandemic in over 100 years. The worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. The most compelling call for racial justice since the 60′s. And the undeniable realities and accelerating threats of climate change.
So, the question for us is simple: Are we ready? I believe we are.
We must be.
All elections are important. But we know in our bones this one is more consequential. America is at an inflection point. A time of real peril, but of extraordinary possibilities. We can choose the path of becoming angrier, less hopeful, and more divided.
A path of shadow and suspicion.
Or we can choose a different path, and together, take this chance to heal, to be reborn, to unite. A path of hope and light.
They are all on the ballot.
Who we are as a nation. What we stand for. And, most importantly, who we want to be. That’s all on the ballot.
And the choice could not be clearer. No rhetoric is needed.
Just judge this president on the facts.
5 million Americans infected with COVID-19. More than 170,000 Americans have died.
By far the worst performance of any nation on Earth.
More than 50 million people have filed for unemployment this year.
More than 10 million people are going to lose their health insurance this year. Nearly one in 6 small businesses have closed this year.
If this president is re-elected we know what will happen. Cases and deaths will remain far too high.
More mom and pop businesses will close their doors for good.
Working families will struggle to get by, and yet, the wealthiest one percent will get tens of billions of dollars in new tax breaks.
And the assault on the Affordable Care Act will continue until its destroyed, taking insurance away from more than 20 million people – including more than 15 million people on Medicaid – and getting rid of the protections that President Obama and I passed for people who suffer from a pre-existing condition.
And speaking of President Obama, a man I was honored to serve alongside for 8 years as Vice President. Let me take this moment to say something we don’t say nearly enough.
Thank you, Mr. President. You were a great president. A president our children could – and did – look up to.
No one will say that about the current occupant of the office.
A president who takes no responsibility, refuses to lead, blames others, cozies up to dictators, and fans the flames of hate and division.
He will wake up every day believing the job is all about him. Never about you. Is that the America you want for you, your family, your children?
I see a different America. One that is generous and strong. Selfless and humble.
It’s an America we can rebuild together.
As president, the first step I will take will be to get control of the virus that’s ruined so many lives.
Because I understand something this president doesn’t.
We will never get our economy back on track, we will never get our kids safely back to school, we will never have our lives back, until we deal with this virus.
The tragedy of where we are today is it didn’t have to be this bad. Just look around.
It’s not this bad in Canada. Or Europe. Or Japan. Or almost anywhere else in the world. The President keeps telling us the virus is going to disappear. He keeps waiting for a miracle. Well, I have news for him, no miracle is coming.
We lead the world in confirmed cases. We lead the world in deaths.
Our economy is in tatters, with Black, Latino, Asian American, and Native American communities bearing the brunt of it.
And after all this time, the president still does not have a plan. Well, I do.
If I’m president on day one we’ll implement the national strategy I’ve been laying out since March.
We’ll make the medical supplies and protective equipment our country needs. And we’ll make them here in America. So we will never again be at the mercy of China and other foreign countries in order to protect our own people.
We’ll make sure our schools have the resources they need to be open, safe, and effective. We’ll put the politics aside and take the muzzle off our experts so the public gets the information they need and deserve. The honest, unvarnished truth. They can deal with that. We’ll have a national mandate to wear a mask-not as a burden, but to protect each other. It’s a patriotic duty.
In short, I will do what we should have done from the very beginning. Our current president has failed in his most basic duty to this nation. He failed to protect us.
He failed to protect America.
And, my fellow Americans, that is unforgivable.
As president, I will make you this promise: I will protect America. I will defend us from every attack. Seen. And unseen. Always. Without exception. Every time.
Look, I understand it’s hard to have hope right now.
On this summer night, let me take a moment to speak to those of you who have lost the most. I know how it feels to lose someone you love. I know that deep black hole that opens up in your chest. That you feel your whole being is sucked into it. I know how mean and cruel and unfair life can be sometimes.
But I’ve learned two things.
First, your loved ones may have left this Earth but they never leave your heart. They will always be with you.
And second, I found the best way through pain and loss and grief is to find purpose. As God’s children each of us have a purpose in our lives.
To finally live up to and make real the words written in the sacred documents that founded this nation that all men and women are created equal. Endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. Among them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
You know, my Dad was an honorable, decent man.
He got knocked down a few times pretty hard, but always got up. He worked hard and built a great middle-class life for our family.
He used to say, “Joey, I don’t expect the government to solve my problems, but I expect it to understand them.“
And then he would say: “Joey, a job is about a lot more than a paycheck. It’s about your dignity. It’s about respect. It’s about your place in your community. It’s about looking your kids in the eye and say, honey, it’s going to be okay.“
I’ve never forgotten those lessons.
That’s why my economic plan is all about jobs, dignity, respect, and community. Together, we can, and we will, rebuild our economy. And when we do, we’ll not only build it back, we’ll build it back better.
With modern roads, bridges, highways, broadband, ports and airports as a new foundation for economic growth. With pipes that transport clean water to every community. With 5 million new manufacturing and technology jobs so the future is made in America.
With a health care system that lowers premiums, deductibles, and drug prices by building on the Affordable Care Act he’s trying to rip away.
With an education system that trains our people for the best jobs of the 21st century, where cost doesn’t prevent young people from going to college, and student debt doesn’t crush them when they get out.
With child care and elder care that make it possible for parents to go to work and for the elderly to stay in their homes with dignity. With an immigration system that powers our economy and reflects our values. With newly empowered labor unions. With equal pay for women. With rising wages you can raise a family on. Yes, we’re going to do more than praise our essential workers. We’re finally going to pay them.
We can, and we will, deal with climate change. It’s not only a crisis, it’s an enormous
opportunity. An opportunity for America to lead the world in clean energy and create millions of new good-paying jobs in the process.
Because we don’t need a tax code that rewards wealth more than it rewards work. I’m not looking to punish anyone. Far from it. But it’s long past time the wealthiest people and the biggest corporations in this country paid their fair share.
For our seniors, Social Security is a sacred obligation, a sacred promise made. The current president is threatening to break that promise. He’s proposing to eliminate the tax that pays for almost half of Social Security without any way of making up for that lost revenue.
I will not let it happen. If I’m your president, we’re going to protect Social Security and Medicare. You have my word.
One of the most powerful voices we hear in the country today is from our young people. They’re speaking to the inequity and injustice that has grown up in America. Economic injustice. Racial injustice. Environmental injustice.
I hear their voices and if you listen, you can hear them too. And whether it’s the existential threat posed by climate change, the daily fear of being gunned down in school, or the inability to get started in their first job — it will be the work of the next president to restore the promise of America to everyone.
I won’t have to do it alone. Because I will have a great Vice President at my side. Senator Kamala Harris. She is a powerful voice for this nation. Her story is the American story. She knows about all the obstacles thrown in the way of so many in our country. Women, Black women, Black Americans, South Asian Americans, immigrants, the left-out and left-behind. But she’s overcome every obstacle she’s ever faced. No one’s been tougher on the big banks or the gun lobby. No one’s been tougher in calling out this current administration for its
extremism, its failure to follow the law, and its failure to simply tell the truth.
Kamala and I both draw strength from our families. For Kamala, it’s Doug and their families. For me, it’s Jill and ours.
No man deserves one great love in his life. But I’ve known two. After losing my first wife in a car accident, Jill came into my life and put our family back together.
She’s an educator. A mom. A military Mom. And an unstoppable force. If she puts her mind to it, just get out of the way. Because she’s going to get it done. She was a great Second Lady and she will make a great First Lady for this nation, she loves this country so much.
And I will have the strength that can only come from family. Hunter, Ashley and all our grandchildren, my brothers, my sister. They give me courage and lift me up.
I will be a president who will stand with our allies and friends. I will make it clear to our adversaries the days of cozying up to dictators are over.
Under President Biden, America will not turn a blind eye to Russian bounties on the heads of American soldiers. Nor will I put up with foreign interference in our most sacred democratic exercise – voting.
I will stand always for our values of human rights and dignity. And I will work in common purpose for a more secure, peaceful, and prosperous world.
History has thrust one more urgent task on us. Will we be the generation that finally wipes the stain of racism from our national character?
I believe we’re up to it. I believe we’re ready.
Just a week ago yesterday was the third anniversary of the events in Charlottesville.
Remember seeing those neo-Nazis and Klansmen and white supremacists coming out of the fields with lighted torches? Veins bulging? Spewing the same anti-Semitic bile heard across Europe in the ’30s?
Remember the violent clash that ensued between those spreading hate and those with the courage to stand against it?
Remember what the president said?
There were quote, “very fine people on both sides.“ It was a wake-up call for us as a country.
And for me, a call to action. At that moment, I knew I’d have to run. My father taught us that silence was complicity. And I could not remain silent or complicit.
At the time, I said we were in a battle for the soul of this nation. And we are.
One of the most important conversations I’ve had this entire campaign is with someone who is too young to vote.
I met with six-year old Gianna Floyd, a day before her Daddy George Floyd was laid to rest. She is incredibly brave.
When I leaned down to speak with her, she looked into my eyes and said “Daddy, changed the world.“
Her words burrowed deep into my heart.
Maybe George Floyd’s murder was the breaking point. Maybe John Lewis’ passing the inspiration.
However it has come to be, America is ready to in John’s words, to lay down “the heavy burdens of hate at last” and to do the hard work of rooting out our systemic racism.
America’s history tells us that it has been in our darkest moments that we’ve made our greatest progress. That we’ve found the light. And in this dark moment, I believe we are poised to make great progress again. That we can find the light once more.
I have always believed you can define America in one word: Possibilities.
That in America, everyone, and I mean everyone, should be given the opportunity to go as far as their dreams and God-given ability will take them.
We can never lose that. In times as challenging as these, I believe there is only one way forward. As a united America. United in our pursuit of a more perfect Union. United in our dreams of a better future for us and for our children. United in our determination to make the coming years bright.
Are we ready? I believe we are. This is a great nation.
And we are a good and decent people. This is the United States of America.
And there has never been anything we’ve been unable to accomplish when we’ve done it together.
The Irish poet Seamus Heaney once wrote: “History says,
The longed-for tidal wave Of justice can rise up,
And hope and history rhyme”
This is our moment to make hope and history rhyme.
With passion and purpose, let us begin – you and I together, one nation, under God – united in our love for America and united in our love for each other.
For love is more powerful than hate. Hope is more powerful than fear. Light is more powerful than dark. This is our moment.
This is our mission.
May history be able to say that the end of this chapter of American darkness began here tonight as love and hope and light joined in the battle for the soul of the nation.
And this is a battle that we, together, will win. I promise you.
Thank you.
And may God bless you.
And may God protect our troops.
Appendix B – Trump
Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much.
And this is due to the great work of FEMA, law enforcement and the individual states. I will be going this weekend. And congratulations, thank you for that great job out there. We really appreciate it. We are one national family, and we will always protect, love and care for each other. Here tonight are the people who have made my journey possible and filled my life with so much joy.
For her incredible service to our nation and its children, I want to thank our magnificent first lady. I also want to thank my amazing daughter Ivanka for that introduction, and to all of my children. Ivanka — please stand up — and to all of my children and grandchildren, I love you more than words can express.
I know my brother Robert is looking down on us right now from heaven. He was a great brother and was very proud of the job we are all doing. Thank you. We love you, Robert.
Let us also take a moment to show our profound appreciation for a man who has always fought by our side and stood up for our values, a man of deep faith and steadfast conviction — our vice president, Mike Pence.
And Mike is joined by his beloved wife, a teacher and military mom, Karen Pence. My fellow Americans, tonight, with a heart full of gratitude and boundless optimism, I profoundly accept this nomination for president of the United States.
The Republican Party, the party of Abraham Lincoln, goes forward united, determined and ready to welcome millions of Democrats, independents and anyone who believes in the greatness of America and the righteous heart of the American people.
In the new term as president, we will again build the greatest economy in history, quickly returning to full employment, soaring incomes and record prosperity. We will defend America against all threats and protect America against all dangers. We will lead America into new frontiers of ambition and discovery, and we will reach four new heights of national
achievement. We will rekindle faith in our values, new pride in our history and a new spirit of unity that can only be realized through love for our great country.
Because we understand that America is not a land cloaked in darkness. America is the torch that enlightens the entire world. Gathered here at our beautiful and majestic White House, known all over the world as the people’s house, we cannot help but marvel at the miracle that is our great American story.
In recent months, our nation and the entire planet has been struck by a new and powerful invisible enemy. Like those brave Americans before us, we are meeting this challenge. We are delivering lifesaving therapies and will produce a vaccine before the end of the year, or maybe even sooner. We will defeat the virus and the pandemic and emerge stronger than ever before. What united generations past was an unshakable confidence in America’s destiny and an unbreakable faith in the American people. They knew that our country is blessed by God and has a special purpose in this world. It is that conviction that inspired the formation of our union, our westward expansion, the abolition of slavery, the passage of civil rights, the space program and the overthrow of fascism, tyranny, and communism.
This towering American spirit has prevailed over every challenge and has lifted us to the summit of human endeavor. And yet despite all of our greatness as a nation, everything we have achieved is now in danger. This is the most important election in the history of our country. Thank you. At no time before have voters faced a clearer choice between two parties, two visions, two philosophies or two agendas. This election will decide if we save the American dream or whether we allow a socialist agenda to demolish our cherished destiny. It will decide whether we rapidly create millions of high-paying jobs or whether we crush our industries and send millions of these jobs overseas, as has been foolishly done for many decades. Your vote will decide whether we protect law-abiding Americans or whether we give free rein to violent anarchists and agitators and criminals who threaten our citizens.
And this election will decide whether we will defend the American way of life or allow a radical movement to completely dismantle and destroy it. It won’t happen. At the Democrat National Convention, Joe Biden and his party repeatedly assailed America as a land of racial, economic and social injustice, so tonight, I ask you a simple question: How can the Democratic Party ask to lead our country when it spent so much time tearing down our country?
In the left’s backward view, they do not see America as the most free, just and exceptional nation on Earth. Instead, they see a wicked nation that must be punished for its sins. Our
opponents say that redemption for you can only come from giving power to them. This is a tired anthem spoken by every repressive movement throughout history, but in this country, we don’t look to career politicians for salvation. In America, we do not turn to government to restore ourselves. We put our faith in almighty God.
Joe Biden is not a savior of America’s soul. He is the destroyer of America’s jobs, and if given the chance, he will be the destroyer of America’s greatness. For 47 years, Joe Biden took the donations of blue-collar workers, gave them hugs, and even kisses, and told them he felt their pain, and then he flew back to Washington and voted to ship our jobs to China and many other distant lands.
Joe Biden spent his entire career outsourcing their dreams and the dreams of American workers, offshoring their jobs, opening their borders and sending their sons and daughters to fight in endless foreign wars, wars that never ended.
behind in their defense payments, but at my strong urging, they agreed to pay $130 billion more a year — the first time in over 20 years that they upped their payments.
And this $130 billion will ultimately go to $400 billion a year, and Secretary General Stoltenberg, who heads NATO, was amazed after watching for so many years and said that President Trump did what no one else was able to do. Thank you.
From the moment I left my former life behind — and it was a good life — I have done nothing but fight for you. I did what our political establishment never expected and could never forgive, breaking the cardinal rule of Washington politics. I kept my promise. Together we have ended the rule of the failed political class, and they are desperate to get their power back by any means necessary. You have seen that. They are angry at me because instead of putting them first, I very simply said, “America first.”
Thank you.
Days after taking office, we shocked the Washington establishment and withdrew from the last administration’s job-killing Trans-Pacific Partnership. I then immediately approved the
Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines, ended the unfair and very costly Paris climate accord and secured, for the first time, American energy independence.
We passed record-setting tax and regulation cuts at a rate nobody had ever seen before. Within three short years, we built the strongest economy in the history of the world. Washington insiders asked me not to stand up to China. They pleaded with me to let China continue stealing our jobs, ripping us off and robbing our country blind, but I kept my word to the American people. We took the toughest, boldest, strongest and hardest-hitting action against China in American history by far.
They said that it would be impossible to replace NAFTA, but again they were wrong. Earlier this year, I ended the NAFTA nightmare and signed the brand-new Mexico-U.S.-Canada agreement into law. And right now, auto companies and others are building their plants and factories in America, not firing their employees, and not deserting us for other countries. In perhaps no area did the Washington special interests try harder to stop us than on my policy of pro-American immigration. But I refused to back down, and today America’s borders are more secure than ever before.
Thank you.
You see, this country loves our law enforcement. They do. They do. They really do. Love and respect. When I learned that the Tennessee Valley Authority laid off hundreds of American workers and forced them to train their lower-paid foreign replacements, I promptly removed the chairman of the board, and now those talented American workers have been rehired and are back providing power to Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina and Virginia.
They have their old jobs back, and some are here with us this evening. Please stand. You went through a lot. Please stand. Thank you. Thank you very much. You have been through a lot. Thank you very much.
Last month, I took on big pharma. You think that’s easy? It’s not. And signed orders that would massively lower the cost of your prescription drugs and give critically ill patients access to lifesaving cures. We passed the decades-long-awaited right to try, right to try.
We also passed V.A. Accountability and V.A. Choice; our great veterans, we’re taking care of our veterans — 91 percent approval rating this month, the V.A. Given by our veterans. First time anything like that has happened.
By the end of my first term, we will have approved more than 300 federal judges, including two new great Supreme Court justices. And to bring prosperity to our forgotten inner cities, we worked hard to pass historic criminal justice reform, prison reform, opportunity zones and long-term funding of historically Black colleges and universities, and before the China virus came in, produced the best unemployment numbers for African-Americans, Hispanic Americans and Asian-Americans ever recorded.
And I say very modestly that I have done more for the African-American community than any president since Abraham Lincoln, our first Republican president.
And I have done more in three years for the Black community than Joe Biden has done in 47 years. And when I am re-elected, the best is yet to come.
Thank you very much.
When I took office, the Middle East was in total chaos. ISIS was rampaging, Iran was on the rise, and the war in Afghanistan had no end in sight. I withdrew from the terrible one-sided Iran nuclear deal.
Unlike many presidents before me, I kept my promise, recognized Israel’s true capital and moved our Embassy to Jerusalem.
In addition, we obliterated 100 percent of the ISIS caliphate and killed its founder and leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. Then, in a separate operation, we eliminated the world’s No. 1 terrorist by far, Qassim Suleimani.
Unlike previous administrations, I have kept America out of new wars, and our troops are coming home. We have spent nearly $2.5 trillion on completely rebuilding our military, which was very badly depleted when I took office, as you know. This includes three separate pay raises for our great warriors.
We also launched the Space Force, the first new branch of the United States military since the Air Force was created almost 75 years ago.
We have spent the last four years reversing the damage Joe Biden inflicted over the last 47 years. Biden’s record is a shameful roll call of the most catastrophic betrayals and blunders in our lifetime. He has spent his entire career on the wrong side of history. Biden voted for the NAFTA disaster, the single worst trade deal ever enacted. He supported China’s entry into the World Trade Organization, one of the greatest economic disasters of all time. After those Biden calamities, the United States lost one in four manufacturing jobs. We laid off workers in Michigan, Ohio, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and many other states. They did not want to hear Biden’s hollow words of empathy. They wanted their jobs back.
As vice president, he supported the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which would have been a death sentence for the U.S. auto industry. He backed the horrendous South Korea trade deal, which took many jobs from our country, and which I’ve reversed and made a great deal for our country. He repeatedly supported mass amnesty for illegal immigrants. He voted for the Iraq war. He opposed the mission that took out Osama bin Laden. He opposed killing Suleimani, he oversaw the rise of ISIS, cheered the rise of China as a positive development for the world. Some positive development. That is why China supports Joe Biden and it desperately wants him to win. I can tell you that upon very good information.
China would own our country if Joe Biden got elected. Unlike Biden, I will hold them fully accountable for the tragedy that they caused all over the world — they caused. In recent months, our nation and the world has been hit by the once-in-a-century pandemic that China allowed to spread around the globe. They could have stopped it, but they allowed it to come out. We are grateful to be joined tonight by several of our incredible nurses and first responders. Please stand and accept our profound thanks and gratitude.
Many Americans, including me — I have sadly lost friends and cherished loved ones to this horrible disease. As one nation, we mourn, we grieve, and we hold in our hearts forever the memories of all of those lives that have been so tragically taken so unnecessary.
In their honor, we unite in their memory. We will overcome it. And when the China virus hit, we launched the largest national mobilization since World War II, invoking the Defense Production Act. We produce the world’s largest supply of ventilators. Not a single American who has needed a ventilator has been denied a ventilator.
