Category: Donald Trump

Introduction to Evolution and Political Systems

Evolution is a term that is most popularly used to describe the gradual development of living organisms over time. Although the term is largely used in science, it can also be applied to many other aspects of the world that don’t necessarily have to do with living beings but that encompass change over time. Political systems are one area that the word evolution can apply to. Over the ages, humanity has tested many different forms of government. Some systems were overthrown, and others were modified to create the political systems that we have today.

After the American Revolution, a democratic system was chosen to be the governing force in the United States. The writers of the American Constitution created a framework for this democratic system but left little room for it to be altered as the need arises and as long as the improvements are within the boundaries of democracy. It appears that President Donald J. Trump believes the time has come to take advantage and tweak the constitution that the American forefathers worked hard to create. If done correctly, changes to the American democratic system can be a good thing; however, Donald Trump may be blurring the lines between democracy and autocracy.

Donald Trump’s Approach to Democracy and Autocracy

Democratic systems aren’t perfect. As President Donald Trump has proven, there is a possibility for authoritarian leaders to find a way to cheat the system and be elected to office. When this happens, it is important for the country to evaluate its existing democratic institutions to ensure that they are strong enough to withstand attack. Weak democratic institutions can bring about one of the greatest fears of the writers of the Constitution: the consolidation of power in the hands of a single person or a small group of people. The power can be used to effectively strip American citizens of freedoms promised to them by the Bill of Rights and destroy democracy.

On the other hand, strong democratic institutions make sure that the system of checks and balances described in the Constitution runs the way it is supposed to and that there is an equal spread of power. To create these strong institutions, political scientists Daniel Ziblatt and Steven Levitsky identified two characteristics that are necessary components in every democracy. They call these characteristics “unwritten rules”. The “unwritten rules” ensure that a democracy can survive an authoritarian leader and that the rights of American citizens will not be jeopardized.

The Role of Democratic Institutions in Safeguarding Democracy

​The “unwritten rules” are basic concepts, but they play a significant role in determining whether a democracy will live or die. The first of these rules is mutual toleration. Under mutual tolerance, political opponents must recognize and accept each other’s opinions even if they disagree. In most democracies, different political parties exist. In the United States, there are a number of political parties, but the two major parties are the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. When the founding fathers wrote the Constitution, they were vague in their wording, leaving the Constitution open for interpretation.

Members of the Democratic and Republican parties have different opinions about how the Constitution should be interpreted. According to Ziblatt and Levitsky’s first “unwritten rule,” the members of the Democratic and Republican parties must acknowledge each other’s interpretation of the Constitution even though it may differ from their own. Without mutual tolerance, political opponents may view each other as enemies of the United States rather than loyal citizens who also want the best for the country. Campaigns would turn into bloody battles, tearing the country apart. The divide would leave enough of an opening for a single person or small group of people to take over and implement radical changes.

​Having only one “unwritten rule” is not enough. Both work hand in hand and are necessary to ensure that democratic institutions cannot be influenced by undemocratic leaders. The Constitution allows each branch of the federal government specific powers. However, it also implements a system of checks and balances to make sure that one branch isn’t appropriating more power than it is supposed to. For example, under the Constitution, the president has the legal ability to nominate Supreme Court justices, but with checks and balances, Congress can decide to disapprove those nominations.

Furthermore, if the Supreme Court constantly rules against the president, as President Roosevelt displayed, the president can decide to nominate additional justices who share the same views as him to sway the balance in his favor. If political leaders exploit their power to the full legal capacity, nothing will really get done, and again, a bloody battle will ensue. In politics, candidates sometimes have to hold back from doing everything they are capable of doing for the greater good of the country. The way Ziblatt and Levitsky explain this in their book How Democracies Die is with the term ‘forbearance.’

Authoritarian Tendencies in Donald Trump’s Leadership

​Autocratic governments typically start out democratic, but due to their weak democratic institutions, leaders with authoritarian tendencies are elected, and they consolidate their power to the point where it is almost impossible for majority rule to be restored. A single person or small group of people holds most of the power, and there are little to no checks and balances. Unlike in democratic societies, where power stems from the citizens, in autocratic societies, power stems from authoritarian leaders. The leaders of these governments are above the law and, therefore, accountable to no one.

​President Donald J. Trump’s nomination shocked many American citizens as well as the majority of the world because of his authoritarian or undemocratic tendencies. A test was created by Juan J. Linz, a political scientist, to determine whether a political candidate is democratic or not. The criteria the test checks are whether the politician encourages violence denies the legitimacy of his opponents, rejects democratic rules, and limits the liberties of those who dare go against him. When analyzed, President Trump fits all these profiles.

​Before Donald Trump was even elected to office, his authoritarian tendencies were clear. His behavior was and still is erratic and impulsive. Starting with his accusations against the president who was in office at that time, it was obvious that Trump did not view anyone as a legitimate opponent. He repeatedly made claims that President Obama was not a citizen of the United States, which, if true, meant that Obama was legally unable to hold office. Trump didn’t stop with Obama. Anyone that stood in his path to the White House was bashed and discredited. Trump continuously accused Hillary Clinton, the frontrunner for the Democratic party, of being a criminal and vowed to prosecute her once he was elected. Trump, disregarding the First Amendment completely, has made it his mission to whip the media into line. Anything anti-Trump or that goes against the policies Trump is trying to create, he immediately brands as “fake news.”

With the term “fake news” spread all around, it is hard to differentiate what is true and what is really “fake news.” This attempt by Trump to curtail the media’s freedom of speech and press is undemocratic and very characteristic of an authoritarian regime. It seems that Trump believes the other elected members of the federal government are there for his personal service and financial gain, and anyone who believes otherwise should be fired. Furthermore, Trump has no problem flexing his executive power. He takes a strong stand on immigration that goes against the entire basis on which the United States was created. The United States is a nation of immigrants, but Trump seems to have forgotten that.

He created a travel ban, restricting immigration from several countries, and when the ban was taken to court because it was deemed unconstitutional, he just revised it, taking full advantage of the law. Trump is also attempting to rescind the citizenship of children born in the United States to illegal immigrants. This goes directly against the Citizenship Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment, which clearly states, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” Only an authoritarian leader would dare go toe to toe with the Constitution like Trump has.

​Democratic institutions must be reinforced if the United States would like to once again be a role model to the rest of the world. To do so, American citizens and politicians have to realize that everyone is entitled to have a voice. There is no such thing as “fake news.” The common goal of the people should be to expand democracy, not turn it into autocracy.

Bibliography

1. Freedland, Jonathan. ‘This Mafia Style Government Makes Trump a Role Model For All Autocrats.’ The Guardian (2018). web. November 2018.
2. Levitsky, Steven and Daniel Ziblatt. ‘How Wobbly is Our Democracy?’ New York Times (2018). web. October 2018.
   —. ‘Is Donald Trump a Threat to Democracy.’ The New York Times (2016). web. October 2018.
3. Sherwood, Susan. What Characterizes an Authoritarian Government? n.d. web. November 2018.
4. Sit, Ryan. Trump Meets Every Criteria for an Authoritarian Leader, Harvard Political Scientists Warn. 1 January 2018. web. November 2018.

Donald Trump and Tom Buchanan: A Comparison

Donald Trump, the forty-fifth President Of The United States, is a politician, businessman, and television personality. Those all are true facts about Donald Trump, but who is he in most of America’s eyes? Yes, he is the forty-fifth President Of The United States, but there is a lot more to him than that. He is arrogant, sexist, racist, and egotistical. On top of all of that, he has also cheated on each one of his wives. The list could go on and on. Tom Buchanan, a character from F. Scott Fitzgerald’s novel The Great Gatsby, is also arrogant, sexist, and egotistical, and he cheated on his wife, Daisy. Donald Trump is the real-life Tom Buchanan through his sexism, infidelity, money spending, and attitude toward the lower class.

Origins of Wealth: A Common Background

Both Tom and Donald were born into rich families, which would classify them as “Old Money.” Donald’s grandfather, Frederick Trump, moved to America in 1885 when he was only sixteen years old. He gained fortune when he opened a restaurant and hotel in Bennett, British Columbia, Canada. He also later opened a restaurant and hotel in Whitehorse, Yukon, Canada. In the book, it does not tell us how far back Tom’s family wealth goes; it just tells us that he was born into a rich family.

Sexism: A Shared Disregard for Women

Unfortunately, sexism has been around for centuries. You would imagine by the year 2019, we would have the sexism thing figured out, but we don’t. Tom Buchanan was unquestionably a sexist. Throughout the book, Tom looks down on women and feels that women are weaker and not as important as men. Tom impulsively punches Myrtle Wilson and breaks her nose because she is screaming Daisy’s name. This action clearly shows that Tom has no respect for women at all. Our own President Of The United States, sadly, is a sexist. Donald Trump has made numerous remarks about women, which were very sexist remarks. He claimed that model and actor Heidi Klum lm was “No longer a 10” because she “looks older.” He also has claimed multiple times that most women are only successful because of their beauty. There are many more comments that Donald has made about women, some of which I cannot name because they are such vile comments.

Infidelity: A Parallel of Betrayal

Infidelity: The action or state of being unfaithful to a spouse. In this case, Donald Trump has committed infidelity way more than Tom has. Tom only had one affair (that we know of) in the book, and that was with Myrtle Wilson. Their affair lasts seven chapters, and then Daisy runs over Myrtle with Gatsby’s yellow car and kills her. Tom was very open about his “relationship” with Myrtle. He even had Nick meet her.

References:

1. Fitzgerald, F. Scott. “The Great Gatsby.” Scribner, 1925.
2. Graham, David A. “How Trump’s Trade War Went From 18 Products to 10,000.” The Atlantic, 15 June 2018, www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/06/trump-tariffs/562004/.
3. Staff. “Ford CEO: Trump Metals Tariffs Took $1B in Profit from Company.” Detroit Free Press, 25 July 2018, www.freep.com/story/money/cars/ford/2018/07/25/ford-earnings-trump-tariffs-china/832003002/.
4. Wang, Yan. “Can Trump Win the US–China Trade War?” East Asia Forum, 5 May 2018, www.eastasiaforum.org/2018/05/05/can-trump-win-the-us-china-trade-war/.

Drop in opium prices cause poor poppy farmers in Mexico to migrate to the U.S., raising tensions between Mexico and the Trump administration. President Trump uses the stereotype of Mexicans being criminals, violent individuals and drug syndicates to further his anti-immigrant campaign. However, studies prove these stereotypes are false. There are better ways to solve issues surrounding illegal immigration and drug trafficking without unjustly criminalizing immigrants.

A woman with her child on her back scratches poppy pods to extract opium crude in Xalpatlahuac, Mexico, on November 16th 2020. (Rodrigo Cruz) In the mountainous region of southwest Mexico, many poor farmers are forced to farm poppy to earn a living due to socioeconomic factors. Recently, there has been a drop in opium latex prices due to several factors. The two main factors are the drop in demand for illegal drugs in the U.S., and the emergence of fentanyl, a highly addictive synthetic opiate. As a result, the profit gained by the poppy farmers decreased dramatically. They no longer have the means to afford necessities and feed their families. In search of better livelihoods, they migrate north into the U.S., causing a crisis along the southwestern American border and causing tensions between Mexico and the Trump administration to rise. (Kirk)

The stereotypical portrayal of Mexicans. Image: General Emilio Campa and his bodyguards, Mexican War, 1912. The U.S. has a deep-rooted stereotype of Mexicans being criminals, violent individuals and drug syndicates. By the mid-20th century, these stereotypes become very powerful in influencing public opinion and it still continues to shape societal prejudices today. (Piccato)

A study of more than 34,000 news stories referencing Hispanics that appeared in major media outlets From February 9 to August 9, 2009. (Pew Research Center) In entertainment media, Mexicans are presented in a negative light. They are often stereotyped as unintelligent, comedic, aggressive, and as criminals. In news media, they are more often reported on crime, illegal immigration, or drug issues rather than acheivements.

President Donald Trump builds his propaganda on this stereotype and uses it to support his anti-immigration campaign by making alleged claims about the threat posed by Mexican immigrants. He depicts Mexico as a nation filled with drugs and crime to further his political agenda (Piccato). In his campaign, Trump labels Mexican immigrants as rapists, criminals and drug traffickers, setting the stage to restrict both legal and illegal immigration (Vives and Castillo).

This form of racial stereotyping is similar to the association of Chinese immigrants with opium dens in East London during the 19th century Britain (East End Opium Dens and Narcotic Use in Britain). Initially, the Chinese arrived in London as workers for shipping companies, and they established shops and services for the seamen as their numbers increased. Soon after, they formed a small isolated community in East London (Berridge, page 3). The emergence of opium in East End Chinese neighbourhoods led to the formation of a negative image the British society has on the Chinese (Berridge, pages 4 to 7). The ‘opium dens’ in East End were said to be “haunted by evil” and the Chinese were described as “cunning and evil” and “wreathing in opium fumes” (Berridge, page 5). However, this myth that the British society accepted as reality was far from the truth. In reality, ‘opium dens’ in East End were social clubs where people smoke opium and gamble for leisure (Berridge, page 7). East End was actually “peaceful and calm” not “dreadful nor horrible” as in their preconceptions (Berridge, page 7 to 8). But fueled by an anti-immigrant sentiment during that time period (Berridge, page 11), the British society viewed the Chinese as dangerous and would “contaminate” the English people with their “evil” opium smoking (Berridge, pages 14 to 15).

In contrast to what most mainstream media tell us today, the truth is that immigrants commit fewer crimes than native-born individuals of comparable age. They come to the U.S. in search of better jobs and opportunities, and they contribute to the labor market in some sectors of the economy. (Piccato) U.S. Incarceration Rates of Men Age 18-39, by Nativity, 1980-2010. (American Immigration Council, July 2017) U.S. Incarceration Rates of Native-Born, Mexican, and Salvadoran/Guatemalan Men, Aged 18-39, Without a High School Diploma, 2000 & 2010. (American Immigration Council, July 2017)

According to a research done by the American Immigration Council, immigrants are less likely than native-borns to be behind bars. Analysing data from the 2010 American Community Survey (ACS), roughly 1.6% of immigrant males aged 18 to 39 are incarcerated, whereas the percentage of male native-borns of the same age group that are incarcerated is 3.3%. For decades, this disparity in incarceration rates between immigrants and native-borns have persisted, as shown by data from the 1980, 1990, and 2000 decennial censuses, and the incarceration rates of the native-born were two to five times higher than that of immigrants in each of those years. As stated by the 2010 Census data, the incarceration rates of young, uneducated Mexican men who comprise the majority of illegal immigrants in the U.S. are much lower than that of native-born young men without a high school diploma. The 2010 census shows that the incarceration rate of less-educated native-born men age 18 to 39 is 10.7%, more than three times that of male Mexican immigrants of the same age group which is 2.8%. Despite studies proving that immigrants are unlikely to engage in criminal behavior compared to native-borns and that immigration is not linked to higher crime rates, many U.S. policymakers draft immigration policies based on their fears and prejudices surrounding these stereotypes, leading to rather unfair and cruel law enforcement towards immigrants. (American Immigration Council)

Said describes Orientalism as the stereotypes, beliefs and assumptions about “The East” or “The Orient” and its people. Orientalism is the Western style for dominating, restructuring, and having authority over the East (Said, page 2 to 3). Orientalism is created by the Europeans as a method for them to dominate the East in the 18th, 19th, and 20th century. They represent the East as a world of antiquity, mysticism, and exotica, in contrast to West (Said, page 1 to 2). This becomes a generalized view of a large number of different and diverse Eastern countries and its people (Said, page 301). This stereotype helps the Europeans establish power over the Eastern countries they colonized, and to justify their invasion as “saving” and “improving” the eastern countries from their “savagery”. (Said, pages 79, 85, 86, 90, 115, 146, 153,170, 171, 306, and 308). The Easterners are characterized as “degenerate”, “uncivilized” and “superstitious” (Said, pages 38, 52, 175, 207, 216, and 247) by the Europeans. These Orientalist views are spread throughout Europe in the form of paintings, plays, and poems, shaping their society’s views of the East (Said, pages 57, 71, 118, 226).

Similar to what we see in Orientalism, Trump uses the “criminal”, “violent” and “drug syndicate” tropes to justify his hate and prejudice against Mexican immigrants (Piccato). He builds on the public’s preconceived prejudices against Mexican immigrants and uses their fear of these negative stereotypes to convince the public to support his campaign and his anti-immigration policies. As the Hispanic population within the U.S. increased from 2001 to 2010, the news media began framing Hispanics as criminals, illegal immigrants, drug traffickers, and violent. Thus, perpetuating the prejudice and discrimination against Mexicans in society, shaping the people’s biased and racist views (Wiki). Children housed in metal enclosures in the US Border Patrol Central Processing Center in McAllen, Texas, on June 17, 2018. (US Customs and Border Protection)

It is distressing that even in the 21st century, such racist and degenerative stereotypes are still being perpetuated in society. It is wrong and unfair to criminalize Mexican immigrants and blame them for drugs and crime problems the country faces, when the majority of them have nothing to do with it. Instead of pointing fingers at immigrants, we should make the legal immigration process more accessible to them, build better programs for immigrants to assimilate into society, eliminate discriminating stereotypes, and create a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants that have resided in the country for a long period of time. This would allow people to register with the government, pass a background check, and be put on a path to permanent residency and eventual citizenship. Building a better immigration system ensures that people no longer have to enter the country illegally or remain outside the law in the future. Hence, They will be contributing to the U.S. economy and paying taxes. We need an immigration system in which there are legal, accessible routes for people to enter into and remain in the U.S and appropriate and fair punishments for violating the rules. (Jawetz)

Building a wall will not stop drug trafficking organizations because they will use alternative routes like ports of entry, underground tunnels, and oceans. Besides, drugs are most commonly smuggled through the ports of entry (Solis). Instead of spending $59.8 billion to build a wall (Nowrasteh), we should work to reduce the demand for illegal drugs in the U.S. and crackdown on money laundering; trade-based money laundering, cryptocurrencies and the darknet to cut off funds for drug trafficking organizations. Moreover, the Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission (CICAD) should help governments in the region expand drug prevention and substance-abuse treatment, such as establishing better drug rehabilitation and treatment programs. Furthermore, regional governments should increase the use of sanctions on public and private individuals that are involved in illicit activities (Galindo).

Is there a reason as to why I should vote for President Trump? President Trump is the current and the 45th president of the United States of America. Being born in the year 1946, he is currently at the age of 74 years. He has been married to Melania Trump, the current First Lady of the United States, since 2005. Before joining politics, Trump was a businessman and also a television personality. In this essay, I will come upon many ideas as to why you should vote for Donald Trump as the 46th president of the United States of America.

Trump’s administration has tried during this era of Covid-19 to maintain a strong economy while still fighting the SARS. The democrats have been criticizing the president’s strategies in fighting this pandemic. When the pandemic reached the states, President Trump’s first action was to close America to China and vice versa. This led to criticism from the democrats stating that Trump has been a racist leader by closing his China borders. This was the right move to stop the spread of the virus, which is believed to have originated from China. After the virus was announced as a pandemic, there was no proposed control of the virus-like it is now.

The economy was put to a halt due to the lockdown in which the democrats tried to criticize Trump for the lockdown. While this action hurt the economy, it was the perfect measure to contain the outrageous spread of SARS in the state. After the Covid-19 seemed to be in control, Trump started easing the lockdown to prevent the American economy’s complete collapse. To date, Trump’s administration has been trying very hard to revive the economy (STRANG, 2020).

Compared to what the democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden thinks about the pandemic during the debate held between the two aspirants, Joe has no idea of how to handle the American economy during this pandemic. I would say he was good at it by saying what Trump’s administration has been doing has not curbed the virus’s spread. On his part, he did not have a clear plan on how to deal with the pandemic and revive the economy. For Trump, I would say he should stay as the president since, so far, everything he is doing seems to be working positively towards the reviving of the economy and also the fight against this global pandemic.

Donald Trump’s presidential campaign certainly displays an aberration in post-1945 American history to a great extent. This is clearly demonstrated through Trump’s deviation in handling racial, gender, and social issues incorporated into shaping US policies. Trump’s nonconformities are clearly prominent through his handling of key issues in comparison to other influential prior presidents of the United States, such as Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton.

Gender is a highly prevalent issue that clearly displays the differing approaches and perspectives of politicians. Politicians have recognized the significance of gender in the organization of the American polity. The perception of women in the United States was highly transformative. Gender exclusion was widespread in American political culture. However, during the post-1945 era, American women discovered themselves at the opening of a renewed century. Significant changes were enforced to diminish the traditional role of male labor and perceiving female labor as an aberration. The abolishment of the family wage was underway, the progression of women incorporated into the workforce doubled, and black women also were entitled to better jobs. With the development of new jobs being opened to African American women from the civil rights movement, the period of the 1960’s and 70’s proved to be an influential time for Black communities, specifically black women. Richard Nixon who served as the US president from 1969-1974, advocated for women and their involvement in the high-level positions. In a response to the unjust treatment of women in the US, Nixon was keen to make a change in shifting the ideology of how women were perceived to a more inclusive approach. Nixon appointed several women in key political roles and prohibited discriminatory ideologies in competitive service regarding race, religion, gender, and color. Nixon directed head chiefs of executive departments to launch action programs to certify equal opportunities in employment were established. Nixon also appointed Virginia Knauer as an executive of the consumer affairs office in the White House.

In contrast to this, President Trump showcased a significantly different approach to gender roles in politics. Trump’s continuous misogynistic nature is clearly representing his presidency as an aberration. Trump’s sexualized comments, reflect his sexist attitude and disrespect to women. Trump consistently promotes women as sex objects and continuously makes inappropriate comments about the physical appearance of female presidential candidates and celebrities, rather than focusing on their intelligence and political abilities. Trump stated to a reporter, “like you wouldn’t have your job, if you weren’t beautiful”. Trump certainly displays his traditionalistic views regarding women in the workforce, he did not approve in appointing women in crucial political roles. Trump’s philosophy is that women should be quiet, submissive, and attractive. This deviancy presented through his ideals of women are clearly dissimilar to Nixon’s approach to gender in American history.

Race is undoubtedly another prevalent topic that was significant in unveiling Trump’s deviation in handling political issues regarding race. Conflicts over class and race birthed a political philosophies and power. The majority of metropolitan areas in the US were highly categorized by profound racial segregation in the post-war era. African Americans were critical activists in their quest to gain economic opportunity and equal rights in America. However, figures in the political system used race to aid their decisions concerning opportunity and metropolitan entry. Ronald Reagan was a controversial figure in his attempts to fight racism in the US. Reagan appeared to use his platform to assist in the abolishment of African American slavery. This was demonstrated through his involvement in organizations that confronted racial discrimination and his contributions in ‘operation terror’ signified his will to challenge racism in the United States. However, Reagan eventually pulled back in aiding anti-racist organizations due to the allegations of America protecting communists. On the other hand, Donald Trump displayed a dramatic confrontational approach to issues regarding race in America, representing an aberration in post-1945 history. Trump openly engages in racial segregation and discrimination, specifically towards African Americans. Trump’s bigotry towards these minority groups shaped the way in which he handled issues involving these groups. Trump advocated for racial prejudice through his racist comments towards black Americans. Trump refused to hire black Americans as he regarded them as “bad for business” and “lazy”. Trump refused them from renting apartments under the Trump organization. Trump enforced racial policies throughout his organization which limited black Americans chances for employment. Trump has also proven to promote violence against African Americans in the recent events concerning George Floyd’s death. Blacks have resorted to looting in a response to their anger surrounding racial discrimination in the US, Trump stated that, “looting leads to shooting”, strengthening his aberration in handling racial matters and justifying police brutality. Thus, Reagan and Trump display instances of promoting the dismissal of blacks, however, Reagan did not resort to discriminatory racial slurs like Trump did to exclude black Americans in areas such as employment.

Trump’s handling of issues regarding class certainly portrays his aberration in post-1945 US history. The social construct of the middle class is a concept that is highly prevalent throughout the US, it has gained great significance of the rhetoric of constitutional parties. Numerous Americans considered themselves as middle-class citizens, post 1945 due to the economic growth experienced by the country. Trump has enforced his will to retract undocumented immigrants, Muslims, and refugees in order to restore the working class. Clearly, reinforcing his racial discrimination through excluding immigrants to gain economic growth for the white workers. Trump declared that “the US will not be a migrant camp”. Thus, Trump capitalized on restrictive boundaries to enforce his appeal to the working class. Contrastingly, president Clinton aimed for the same outcome Trump did, to strengthen the economic growth of America. However, Clinton did not resort to derogatory efforts to benefit the American working class. Instead, Clinton implemented welfare reforms to place Americans into workforces, improved housing support for families with a low-income, and aided in expanding federal support to improve access into higher educational facilities. Thus, displaying Trump’s approach in handling the growth of the middle class as an aberration in contrast to Clinton’s approach to this matter.

Ultimately, Donald Trump’s presidency represents an aberration in post 1945 US history to a great extent. This is evident through his handling of crucial events in relation to gender, race, and class. Trump’s sexist attitudes and comments towards women, his discriminatory attitude towards African Americans in the workforce, and his dismissal of minority groups to benefit the white working class undoubtedly portray his deviance through his presidential campaign.

The election of 2016 was between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. This was the 58th American presidential election, and it took place on Tuesday, November 8, 2016. Both candidates were having conventions, trying to persuade the Americans, by telling them what they will do to make the United States great. In the end, Republican Donald Trump defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton. Trump won with his electoral votes at 304 and popular votes at 62,980,160. While, Hillary got 227 on electoral votes and beat Trump in popular votes at 65,845,063. The election of 2016 brought a lot of mixed emotions for voters. People felt like they didn’t have control over the process. There were people that were anxious, excited, saddened, hateful, and hopeful about the election. During the presidential election, there is always a chance that the person you would prefer to be the next president may not win. Then, you may have to deal with someone that you loathe as president for the next four years! The Election of 2016 was one of the most controversial elections, and it brought lots of controversy over the impact on the U.S. economy, the impact on this country and the impact on migration within the country and into this country.

First, the impact the election of 2016 had on the U.S. economy. According to a survey by Bankrate having over 1,000 respondents, the survey asked which they think is the biggest threat to the U.S. economy in the next 6 months due to the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. About 61% said that the presidential election outcome would be the biggest threat to the economy. 12% terrorism, 9% struggling overseas economies, 8% stock market decline, 5% increase in interest rates and 4% said something else or that they don’t know. Donald Trump promised to become the ‘greatest jobs-producer in history’ and to do that he would impose tariffs on China, Mexico, and other trade partners. Trump promised to repeal Obamacare and replace it with a universal market-based plan.

Second, the impact of migration within the country and into this country from the election of 2016. Undocumented immigrants who commit crime has been a big focus on Trump’s deportation plans. “While there are many illegal immigrants in our country who are good people, many, many, this doesn’t change the fact that most illegal immigrants are lower skilled workers with less education, who compete directly against vulnerable American workers, and that these illegal workers draw much more out from the system than they can ever possibly pay back. And they’re hurting a lot of our people that cannot get jobs under any circumstances”, – Donald Trump. Donald Trump has also promised to build a wall. During his immigration speech, on August 31, 2016, he claimed: “We will build a great wall along the southern border. And Mexico will pay for the wall. One hundred percent. They don’t know it yet but they’re going to pay for it”. Trump also had a temporary ban on Muslims and this was his most controversial immigration policy. Now, the focus is more on preventing Syrian refugees from entering the country.

Third, the impact the election of 2016 had on this country. Hours after Donald Trump was elected president, the nation carved into two large coalitions (an alliance for combined action, especially a temporary alliance of political parties forming a government or of states), roughly equal in size but radically different in demographics and desires. Meanwhile, across the country, thousands of minorities, millennials and women took the streets and started protests that were fueled by frustration, fear, and disillusionment in a country they feel that, by electing Trump, is now entering a dark and divisive era. The election of 2016 also had a huge impact on the nation’s schools. In the first couple of days after the 2016 presidential election, the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Teaching Tolerance project created an online survey to K–12 educators from across the country. Over 10,000 teachers, counselors, administrators, and others who work in schools responded to the survey. The survey data indicate that the results of the election are having a profoundly (to a profound extent; extremely) negative impact on schools and students. 90% of educators report that school climate has been negatively affected, and most of them believe that it will have a long-lasting impact. About 80% describe heightened anxiety and concern on the part of students worried about the impact of the election on themselves and their families.

In conclusion, the election of 2016 was one of the most controversial elections, and it brought lots of controversy over the impact on the U.S. economy, the impact on this country and the impact on migration within the country and into this country. Everybody has their own opinion on the election of 2016 whether it went in their favor or went in the total complete opposite direction they were expecting it to go. The election of 2016 brought a lot of mixed emotions for voters. People felt like they didn’t have control over the process. There were people that were anxious, excited, saddened, hateful, and hopeful about the election. In the end, Donald Trump was the winner of the election of 2016.

Donald Trump is one of the most famous and prominent US Presidents. As a person, he has both strengths and weaknesses. In this essay, it is to them that I intend to turn my attention.

Strengths of Donald Trump

1. Riches. Donald Trump has entered the Forbes world positioning of extremely rich person and has been relied upon to claim resources and have a total asset over $3.1 billion. Point of fact regardless of whether he wasn’t the leader of the US he despite everything would have been notable around the globe only because of the status of his fund. Since he has become the president, the Trump realm has developed to the degree that now they own few properties all through the province.
2. His power over different divisions. Donald Trump isn’t only any president who will oppose the claims that are coordinated against him. The way the administration works in the US is that, when the president is changed, his whole organization will likewise change. The change that occurred with Donald Trump gradually began to create and by making key move, Trump terminated numerous individuals and selected a few in different pieces of government, which can ensure that nobody will at any point approach Donald Trump in any capacity. The moderate however undeniably noticeable choice won’t just assist him with dodging issues later yet will likewise assist him with extending and execute all assents and even his business successfully.

Weaknesses of Donald Trump

1. Allegations. It is normal information that Donald Trump has been shot a ton lately for some reasons. Some of them are genuinely biased on the grounds that they could even expel him from the job of the president. His expense forms claim of being engaged with Russians during the presidential race and the numerous other sexual charges that have come up as of late. The main thing that could truly hurt him is the Muller report, which has still not been made open, and as per Trump and his organization, they may never be distributed. The principle reason they are not prepared to unveil reports is that they contain a great deal of data that can harm their notoriety.
2. The power he distributed to his family. As leader of the US, he has increased a great deal of intensity, however one of the primary shortcomings of Donald Trump is his family, since they know all the insider facts and real factors of him. He as of late allowed and circulated a huge amount of capacity to the two his little girl Ivanka Trump and her significant other. This measure of intensity could be enough to vanquish Donald Trump, making it perhaps the greatest shortcoming.
3. Backing out alliances. Throughout the years, Trump has made numerous foes inside and outside his organization. The steady battle with Mexico over the divider and tossing its own part under the transport has made a huge number of foes. Until this point, 8 individuals who worked under his organization have been captured and accused of various violations. Although he didn’t utter a word about them, however the steady excusal of his own workers could prompt his own fall sooner rather than later.

Trump’s Weaknesses Are Also His Political Strength

But we can also say that Trump’s weaknesses are also his political strength

Never has a presidential up-and-comer been released so openly thus regularly against pundits. He over and over assaulted not just his rivals for setting out to censure him, yet in addition writers, party pioneers, government authorities, church pioneers, et al. Since he is so prejudiced of pundits, his staff and his substitutes attempt to adhere to the ‘order of the message’ to state everything Trump says, even they need to shield him for votes – jeans and clear lies. For the sake of Trump, they will redirect, misshape, or imagine obliviousness; however, they occasionally perceive that he said or accomplished something incorrectly.

Trump is regularly called a harasser. His brief and pompous proclamation that President Obama was conceived in the US seems to fit the profile of a harasser: in the wake of advancing the conspiratorial lie of barters for a long time, he chilled out under tension, and afterward, instead of to get up and apologize, he fled columnists’ inquiries. Numerous Republican ‘pioneers’ feared Trump and his fans as they surrendered to him. For instance, Rick Perry, previous Texas senator and presidential competitor, has proceeded to state that Trump was “a malignant growth of conservatism” to commend him and even guard his assaults against the Khans, the Gold Star group of a fallen fighter in battle. While it is hard to demonstrate that the media was additionally scared by Trump, obviously during the GOP primaries, numerous columnists and moderators were hesitant to squeeze Trump with follow-up addresses that he dislikes.

Trump has advanced more paranoid notions than likely the entirety of the previous presidential up-and-comers set up. A portion of his ‘speculations’ appear to follow – as there are a few times that Ted Cruz’s dad could have been a partner of JFK’s professional killer Lee Harvey Oswald. Before, if a presidential up-and-comer had truly proposed that paranoid fears appeared to be authentic on the grounds that they were accounted for in the National Enquirer or in light of the fact that ‘numerous individuals state’ that they could be valid, the media would have changed this competitor in a fool. Be that as it may, in this appointive cycle, numerous media have discovered Trump’s bareness so engaging and helpful for notes and snaps, they have not adequately uncovered how oblivious, jumpy, and/or flighty to push hypotheses likewise insane. What’s more, many Trump fans really accept these speculations.

No other presidential competitor has taken up the two sides of such a significant number of issues – positively not around the same time. He regularly changes positions inside a couple of hours; most likely after his staff or counsels let him know of the political bother of his idiot proof position. Since Trump doesn’t have an intelligible belief system, supporters can extend anything they need to accept onto him. A few preservationists guarantee he is traditionalist, while others figure he would oversee like the past form of Trump, a Democrat from New York who gave to Liberal Democrat up-and-comers and the Clinton Establishment.

Trump brags of himself more than some other presidential up-and-comer ever – and likely more than anybody you’ve at any point met. His fans state he is just advancing his image as an artist and that he has no egotism. Many need a tough man. Trump played a challenging pioneer on his unscripted TV drama, ‘The Understudy’. Evidently, numerous voters need the challenging and brave tycoon that the editors of the arrangement depicted in this exquisite program. His fans are restless to accept his cases that only he can take care of the country’s issues. After an extensive stretch of gridlock and brokenness in Washington, D.C., many purchase his message: ‘What do you need to lose?’.

In conclusion, I want to say that Donald Trump not only has strong and weak personal qualities, but also skillfully ‘turns’ his weaknesses into strengths and advantages.

Donald John Trump is the United States’ 45th President, in office as of January 2017. He is also a wealthy business magnate and television host, in addition to being a politician. Trump, the son of a wealthy real estate developer, attended the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, before taking over the business of his family. A crafty and charismatic businessman during his business career, he designed and restored several hotels, casinos and office buildings, racking up a net worth of billions. He also held many beauty pageants, and also expanded into reality TV. Expanding the horizons of his ambitions, In the early 2000s, he entered national politics and focused his sights on the presidential office. As a politician, his reputation was marred by accusations of sexual assault and he also received much condemnation from Islamic nations for his lavish lifestyle and derogatory remarks about immigrants. Trump ran for the 2016 presidential election as a Republican amid the scandals surrounding him and in a stunning win that beat Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. Donald Trump is the first person to take office without active military or government service, and at 70 he is also the oldest person to take office.

Trump has presidential ambitions. He expressed his intention to run for the US presidency as a third-party candidate in the 2000 elections. He speculated about running for president in the Republican Party in 2004 and 2008 and in the meantime, he considered running for New York governor as a party candidate in 2006. He registered again as a Republican in 2009 after having registered with the Democratic Party in 2001 and campaigned for it.

In 2010-2012, his involvement in politics intensified when he publicly announced his consideration of candidature for presidency again. However, his involvement with the ‘Birther problem’ disregarded his political popularity, a party that strongly claimed that Barack Obama was not born in the US. But on various political topics he appeared to be up against Obama.

In January 2013, he endorsed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during the Israeli elections. At the 2013 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), he was a featured speaker as well.

Donald Trump was very popular at the start of his presidency, on just day 6, 47.8% of people approved of Trump, but it almost immediately started dropping and by day 200 he dropped done to 36.6% when his fans started losing interest. From the 1980s Trump periodically mused in public about running for president, but those moments were widely dismissed in the press as publicity stunts. He moved his electoral registration from the Republican to the Reform Party in 1999 and set up a Presidential Exploratory Committee. While he finally declined to run in 2000, that year he published a book, ‘The America We Deserve’, in which he laid out his political beliefs that were socially liberal and economically conservative. Trump later rejoined the Republican Party, and he maintained a high public profile during the 2012 presidential election. While at that time he did not run for office, he gained a lot of publicity for regularly and falsely alleging that Democratic Pres. Trump started issuing a series of executive orders almost immediately upon taking office, intended to fulfil some of his campaign promises and to project a picture of rapid, decisive action. His first directive, signed on his first day as president, ordered that, before the ‘prompt repeal’ of that statute, all ‘unwarranted economic and regulatory burdens’ imposed by the ACA should be reduced. Five days later, he ordered the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to start preparing to create a wall along the southern border of the country. An ethics executive order placed a five-year ban on ‘lobbying practices’ by former employees in the executive branch but relaxed or eliminated certain lobbying limits imposed by the Obama administration.

I conclusion, Donald Trump has had a very successful life and years as president. Trump has delivered very good results for the American public and has done what he wanted to do. I believe he will be in the office for another 4 years and will many more changes to ‘make America great again’.

Introduction

This study’s main goal is to analyze how both Trump and Clinton conform to gendered speech styles and sociolinguistic interactional approaches to language and gender. This includes ‘the four D’s’, which is an approach to gendered language that contains the deficit, dominance, difference, and dynamic models. However, this study will not look into how the dynamic model can be applied due to its lack of relevance to this debate. During the 2016 election, both Trump and Clinton comply with the typical language styles of their respective genders. This compliance perpetuates stereotypes surrounding not only gender and language but gender as a whole. This transcript, from the first presidential debate, is full of gendered discourse that this study will analyze in order to understand how gendered speech styles are present in politics and how this affects gender perception in the wider world. This study will also look to understand how Trump’s use of language abides by stereotypical male gender norms and how Clinton conforms to some gender norms, but also how she rejects them through her use of language.

Background

The real beginning of research into language and gender began in the ’70s when books such as Lakoff’s ‘Language and Woman’s Place’ were released. It began to take off in the ’90s, as third-wave feminism began to rise and more research began to be produced, including Tannen’s ‘You Just Don’t Understand. To continue, interactional approaches to language and gender look into interactions between men and women and attempt to understand how and why this differs. A common theory within interactional models is called ‘The four D’s’. This refers to four different approaches to gendered speech styles. The first is a deficit, which argues that men’s and women’s speech styles differ because women lack assertiveness and dominance within their speech. This model is closely related to Lakoff who argued women’s lack of assertiveness is apparent in several ways and presents itself as a form of politeness. She states ‘ women’s speech sounds much more ‘polite’ than men’(Lakoff and Bucholtz, 2004). She argues the lack of dominance is present through the use of ‘tag questions’ which are a kind of polite statement, in that it does not force agreement or belief on the addressee’(Lakoff and Bucholtz, 2004). It is also present, she argues, through high-rise intonation. This connotes uncertainty and Lakoff argues this is the result of socialization into different gender roles. The second is dominance, which argues men dominate the sphere of language. Due to the language being man-made, the dominance model argues it props up the patriarchy by limiting women’s ability to properly express themselves. The model is linked to Dale Spender, who argues that ‘women remain ‘outsiders’, borrowers of the language’(Spender, 2001). She uses the example of motherhood, in the way that language has made it so that it is difficult for women to speak negatively of motherhood and childbirth, due to the connotations of motherhood as solely positive. Zimmerman and West add to the dominance model by arguing men dominate language by violating turn-taking rules and interrupting frequently (Zimmerman and West, 1996). The next is a difference, which takes a more lenient approach and argues that as children we are socialized into separate gender roles. From there we are socialized into different sociolinguistic subcultures and adopt different forms of communication, therefore the differences in language are a form of miscommunication. However, this model has been critiqued for conforming to biological essentialism as it reinforces the divide between men and women and perpetuates the idea we are biologically hardwired. The last model is dynamic, which rejects biological essentialism, and draws on the idea that different structures keep gendered language norms in place rather than gender itself. It focuses on the idea that identity is fluid rather than binary.

Methodology

This study will carry out a discourse analysis of the Trump vs Clinton debate which occurred on the 26th of september 2016 and was the first debate between the two. As electives of both the democratic and republican parties, the two already share different views in terms of politics, and their use of language further highlights both their difference in ideological beliefs, but also their difference in gendered speech styles as laid out by Holmes and Stubble. They argue that there are ‘feminine’ and ‘masculine’ styles of speech. Feminine features of speech include being indirect, giving supportive feedback, being person orientated and often giving minor contributions in public(Ehrlich, Meyerhoff, Holmes and Stubbe, 2003). However, although Clinton conforms to some of these, she also rejects many. For example, within this debate she gave large contributions with substantial justifications. To continue, Masculine features are identified as being direct, confrontational, competitive, dominating talking time, committing aggressive interruptions and being outcome orientated. This applies to Trump overtly, and therefore this debate has been chosen because both Trump and Clinton’s language choices conform to the interactional approaches mentioned above and through their language choices they both play into typical gender roles of men and women. Trump, especially, considering his several sexist comments over the years, is an excellent example when discussing gender and language. This study will firstly analyse the ways in which the two comply with interactional theories of gendered language (The four D’s) in politics. It will secondly analyse the ways in which their use of language conforms to wider gender norms, but also how Clinton rejects some of these norms and how Trump embodies them.

Analysis

To begin, we can apply the four interactional models of gender and language to this debate in several ways. Firstly, Clinton abides to the deficit model several times. For example, she stated ‘I think (50) and ‘I believe’ (137) repeatedly throughout the debate. This use of tentative language is a feature of politeness and conforms to Lakoff’s theory of female socialisation into a polite form of language. It also presents her speech as uncertain and apologetic, which can ultimately undermine the actual message she is trying to convey. However her use of personal pronouns ‘I’ allows her to present a more personal side to her viewers which helps her to create authenticity. This conforms to gendered speech styles, in which research has proven women are more likely to use personal pronouns than men. For example, Lenard argues ‘Brownlow et al.’s (2003) research of linguistic behavior…found that women used the pronoun I more than men’(Lenard, 2021). This links to the idea that women in politics are more closely related to personal issues, for example childcare, families and healthcare, which perpetuates the stereotypical belief that women are ‘homemakers’ even in their political roles. In contrast, Trump expresses his assertiveness multiple times throughout the debate. For example, he states ‘that makes me smart’(646). The authoritative narrative Trump uses presents him as powerful and domineering as he exerts confidence in everything he says. The adjective ‘smart’ allows him to present himself as superior and conforms to the deficit model in the sense that he asserts his male power by highlighting his intelligence and authority.

Secondly, the two conform to the dominance model of gender and language in many ways. The most important example of this is Trump’s numerous interruptions. He routinely uses interruptions as a way to claim back his political identity by claiming that anything that is said about him is untrue. For example, when discussing climate change, Clinton discusses how Trump believes climate change is a hoax, to which he replies ‘I did not. I did not. I do not say that’ (223). He uses repetition in an attempt to assert authority, however he changes from the past tense to the future tense which undermines his claim. Despite the fact that the exact tweet he released was still up at the time, he still blatantly lies and attempts to use dominating language to side step this issue. He also uses ‘excuse me’ (264) repeatedly when interrupting. This contrasts with Clinton’s politeness, as typically this phrase is used in a respectful manner and Trump alternatively uses it to facilitate his rude interruptions. Trump also interrupts even after asking Clinton a question, he states ‘And, Hillary, I’d just ask you this’ (258), then blocks her answer with another interruption. Here, he clearly violates turn-taking rules of conversation and through this tries to show dominance over Clinton. We can relate this to Zimmerman and Wests theory of the dominance model, as their study found men exert dominance in language by ignoring general rules of conversations. Their study of 31 conversations found men interrupted 46 times while women only interrupted twice(Zimmerman and West, 1996). The huge difference in interruptions between men and women support the idea that men are more likely to violate turn-taking rules and therefore appear more dominant than women. Trump and Clinton both follow the trend in this debate and therefore conform to the dominance model of language and gender. To continue, Trump often uses patronising language, including ‘Secretary Clinton — yes, is that OK? Good. I want you to be very happy.’(163). The use of a question presents sarcasm, and although this could be an attempt at authenticity, it poses as a snarky comment. The patronising nature of this comment can be perceived, again, as an attempt at exerting authority.

Thirdly, Trump and Clinton both conform to the difference model of language and gender throughout their debate. This is present firstly through Clinton’s use of personal anecdotes and information. She states ‘my father was a small businessman’(133). Again, her use of the personal pronoun ‘my’ illustrates an intimate relationship she intends to form with the audience and listeners. She also discusses her ‘father’, which connotes family and close relationships, which in turn allows her to present herself as authentic and trustworthy. She also identifies his occupation as a ‘small businessman’ which intensifies this authenticity and highlights her humble upbringing. This is especially beneficial when taking into context the party she is part of and their ideological beliefs in terms of wealth and tax raises for the rich. Tannen argues that as we are socialised, men are taught to value facts while women are taught to value personal conversations. She argues that speech for men is ‘more like giving a report than establishing rapport’(Tannen, 1992), like it is for women. This is apparent in this debate as Clinton uses personal information to gain the trust of her supporters and the different subcultures of language we are socialised into are clear here. In contrast, Trump’s anecdotes appear to be in favour of boosting his own ego rather than an attempt at appearing authentic. For example, ‘I did a great job’ (1100). The use of the adjective ‘great’ highlights his confidence and conviction, despite the fact that what he did was force Obama to provide a birth certificate after accusing him of not being a US citizen. The contrast of his actions and his pride highlights Trump’s incompetence in an almost ironic way. This difference in language can be associated with the different forms of language we are socialised into as children and this manifests itself as more masculine and feminine speech styles. However in regards to the dynamic approach to language and gender, this study will not touch on how it can be applied to this debate. This is because it has limited implications that can be linked with this debate and the other three models apply more convincingly.

This next section of analysis will focus on how Trump adheres to male stereotypes of gender and how Clinton rejects stereotypically female roles through their use of language. Firstly, Trump’s use of language routinely plays into the gender norms of men. He very often displays features of the ‘male bravado’ most likely influenced by ‘hegemonic masculinity’. His use of one word answers and short sentences, such as ‘Wrong. Wrong’(1293) highlights his dominant position in society, as he is confident that his authoritative tone of voice and body language is enough to prove his point. Here, he uses accusatory language which highlights his aggression and male gendered speech, as ‘the main characteristic of his masculine verbal communication was accusatory speech’(Grebelsky-Lichtman and Katz, 2019).He also makes little attempt to justify many of his answers, further illustrating his power as a male. In order to show his masculinity he discusses how he doesn’t listen to others advice and his autonomy over his decisions are clear. He states ‘And that’s against-my lawyers’(618). The use of the word ‘against’ connotes confrontation and conflict and presents his dominating nature by emphasising that he cannot be controlled by others, even if they’re trained professionals. In contrast, Clinton, as the first female presidential candidate of a major party, rejects gender norms associated with femininity through her choice of language . For example, the stereotype of women as subordinate in speech interactions is rejected through phrases she uses often such as ‘we need’(758) and ‘we should’ (721). The use of modals expresses her conviction and authority, by presenting her ideas as necessary rather than merely requests. Here the wider gender norm that women are submissive is rejected through her authoritative tone. In addition, the larger implications of gender specific norms are highlighted through Trump’s use of casual and dismissive language. For example, he uses the word ‘like’(980) as an adverb and the interjection ‘ugh’(900), highlighting his nonchalant attitude. However, it can be argued if Clinton was to use this speech style she would be critiqued by both the media and public for being rude or bratty. This plays into the gender stereotype that women who are outspoken are bossy and impolite.

Conclusion

To conclude, this 2016 Trump vs Clinton debate exhibits a multitude of examples of gendered discourse and highlights how gender norms in general are present in language. They both conform to interactional approaches to gendered language. They firstly conform to the deficit model through Clinton’s use of tentative and polite language, in contrast Trump uses assertive and confident language in order to present himself as powerful. They conform to the dominance model mainly through Trump’s constant interruptions, which Zimmerman and West identify as ways men utilise language to express dominance. Thirdly, they conform to the difference model through mainly Clinton’s use of personal and intimate subject matter and her anecdotes. On the other hand, Trump favours anecdotes as a way to fuel his hypermasculine identity rather than to convey a sense of trustworthiness. However, the dynamic model is difficult to apply to this debate, as it relies on the idea that gender identity is now fluid and both Trump and Clinton identify as their biological binary genders and express language speech styles of their designated gender. Lastly, Trump’s use of language highlights how he abides by gender norms of masculinity by appearing dominant and aggressive. In contrast, Clinton utilizes language to reject gender norms of women as weak and submissive by adopting more typically male speech styles. However, ultimately the two both conform to their respective gendered speech styles throughout the debate.

Bibliography

1. Lakoff, R. and Bucholtz, M., 2004. Language and Woman’s Place. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p.50.
2. Spender, D., 2001. Man-made language. London: Pandora, p.12.
3. Ehrlich, S., Meyerhoff, M., Holmes, J. and Stubbe, m., 2003. The handbook of language, gender, and sexuality. Pp.572-599.
4. Lenard, D., 2021. Gender differences in the usage of the personal pronoun on the corpus of congressional speeches. Journal of Research Design and Statistics in Linguistics and Communication Science, p.116.
5. Zimmerman, D. and West, C., 1996. Sex roles, interruptions, and silences in conversation.
6. Tannen, D., 1992. You just don’t understand. P.112.
7. Grebelsky-Lichtman, T. and Katz, R., 2019. When a man debates a woman: Trump vs. Clinton in the first mixed-gender presidential debates. Journal of Gender Studies, 28(6), pp.699-719.
8. Trump, D. and Clinton, H., 2016. Read a Transcript of the First Presidential Debate. [online] Time. Available at:

President Donald J. Trump and Richard Nixon are known for setting famous “firsts” in history. Nixon devoted his entire life to the world of politics, whereas Trump has never held a single political office before becoming president. Then we have Trump who has been impeached twice by the House of Representatives and contrastingly, there is Nixon who resigned before the impeachment process began during the Watergate Scandal. Towards the end of the Trump presidency, after the insurrection of the United States Capitol, many of his advisors brought up the idea of a possible resignation, and banned the comparison of him to Richard Nixon at the White House. Ironically, this essay will focus on the comparison between Trump and Nixon in terms of their foreign policy differences in Russia, China, the Middle East, and Vietnam. Furthermore, this essay will also explore the President’s various achievements, personalities, characteristics, and communication strategies to ensure their agenda aligns with the goals of the American People. Looking at many of the similarities and differences in Trump and Nixon’s foreign policy strategy, it is apparent that Nixon’s foreign policy strategy has allowed him to not only create peace with China and the Soviet Union, but those efforts also contributed to establishing world order, especially in the Middle East and in Southeast Asia. This has been widely praised by the American people, thus, his efforts resemble what an American idealist would do — working to benefit the American people and advancing America’s agenda.

Trump and Nixon operated on the idea of populism, but what differed was their use of strategies and methods. Nixon was able to help improve trade relations with China and the Soviet Union using détente, something that Trump could not do — he in fact, started a trade war between China and instilled some of the toughest sanctions in Russia such as not lifting the Russia’s invasion of Crimea in 2014. Nixon’s civil negotiations with China and the Soviet Union is something that stood out in his foreign policy — it was always in line with his goals and it is apparent that it is driven by American idealism. Nixon and his Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger confronted communism and old allies that now had become economic adversaries and were committed to advance economic growth. Nixon made sure the balance of power was established using the policy of triangulation and his consideration of rapprochement is what allowed his administration to thrive in foreign policy. The underlying reasons for Nixon to consider rapprochement stems from the potential he sees in China that it could grow to be a huge market, but more importantly, because it increases the Sino-Soviet tension. It is a very smart move by Nixon considering that he notices the “growing dissidence between the U.S.S.R and China has limited both countries in the pursuit of policies basically antagonistic to U.S. interests.” Even in today’s society, being able to negotiate with China and Russia remains a challenge with the U.S. because of the loss of trust that has occurred between these two countries. The national security threat with Chinese companies posing as spies in the United States, i.e. Huawei, along with the meddling done in the 2016 presidential election has further divided the relationship between the U.S. with China and Russia.

In regards to the Middle East, Trump brokered a peace deal for the first time in more than a quarter-century with Israelis and Arabs — the Abraham Accords, the agreement that stabilized the relationship with the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Sudan. It is an achievement in the Trump administration that should not be dismissed as it will be easier for the U.S. to be able to deal with other countries in the Middle East. During the Nixon administration, he dealt with the aftermath of the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, in which it left Syria and Egypt to attack Israel, so they were able to reclaim the territories that they lost during the war. During that time, Nixon established “Shuttle Diplomacy,” in which Kissinger traveled between the Middle East capitals to negotiate peace after the Arab-Israeli War in 1973. Nixon was not able to broker peace, but later ended up aiding Israel by sending them two billion dollars worth of military supplies and with Kissinger securing a cease-fire agreement between Israel and Syria. Although Nixon did all he could to reduce tensions in the Middle East, dealing with the Middle East was more of a pitfall for Nixon in his foreign policy strategy, but one of Trump’s strong suits as he was actually able to get the countries to sign the peace treaty. However, it is important to note that all Secretary of States since Kissinger have used shuttle diplomacy to further U.S. foreign policy goals.

Southeast Asia has been an issue for both presidents, but Nixon’s way of handling Southeast Asia in regards to what he was faced with was remarkable. When Nixon was inaugurated back in 1969, the U.S. had been involved with the Vietnam War which had killed 30,000 Americans and several hundred thousand Vietnamese citizens. One of Nixon’s goals during his 1968 presidential campaign was to end the Vietnam War, hence his motto, “Peace with Honor.” He rightfully did so by announcing the Nixon Doctrine, in which the United States would help with defense if needed, but the allied nations are still in control of their own security. This doctrine was applied during “Vietnamization,” a policy which helped end the Vietnam War by training South Vietnamese troops and reducing the number of American troops in Vietnam. This also helped their goal of de-escalating tensions with the Soviet Union and China in order for their policy of détente to be more effective. The establishment of the Nixon Doctrine was a mutual benefit as it allowed for world cooperation, rather than the United States aiding to solve the problem of communism. During Trump’s presidency, he had to help mitigate issues in the South China Sea, with regards to China’s nine-dash line claim which overlaps with some of the pre-existing maritime zones (Vietnam being one of the countries involved). China has constantly been deploying research vessels and oil rigs to the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of Vietnam, which has really affected Vietnam’s ability to trade in order to prosper economically. Since Trump and Vietnam have always had a shared interest in getting rid of China, Vietnam now needs to look for other sustainable options such as increasing relations with Japan since they are unsure of what President Biden will do.

It is ironic how President Trump and Nixon had become pen-pals back in the 1980’s, and they “engaged in something of an exercise in mutual affirmation.” Fast forward to 41 years later, that perception has changed once it was announced that Trump would be known as the former president and he completely disregarded any comparison between him and Nixon — that was why anything along the lines of resignation was not a viable option for Trump. That mentality instilled in Trump — a person that is never able to accept defeat — is probably what makes him stand out amongst all political figures. The first not to attend an incoming president’s inauguration, the first to win a presidential election without prior political experience, and most importantly, the first to have made 30,573 false or misleading claims as president, according to The Washington Post. Then we have Nixon, who is more reserved and follows the “rules” of a traditional politician, which is good because he could improve his own ratings because what he does is what the American people want, as shown by his leadership during the Vietnam War and his establishment of the Nixon Doctrine. However, with Trump’s extreme narcissist personality, combined with his “low agreeable” demeanor, one that contrasts Nixon heavily, makes him the president where countries such as China are traumatized by him for his harsh trade deals, also known as the China-United States Trade War. Back in January 2020, Trump was able to navigate and negotiate a “phrase-one China deal,” with “China agreeing to an additional $200 billion in U.S. purchases.” These negotiations are leading America to having “the hottest economy in modern history,” as Kayleigh McEnany, Trump’s White House Press Secretary describes. Although left as one of the most controversial presidents in history, Trump’s ability to reshape the judiciary branch, establish a space force, making sure there is tax reform, and signing the First Step Act into law are some of his significant accomplishments. On the other hand, with Nixon being able to excel in foreign, environmental, and domestic policies is what brings him prominence.

There is no doubt that both administrations mastered the art of communication. It is worth noting that both presidents despised the press and never instilled any trust in them. It is funny how the individuals running the Press shop in both the Nixon and Trump administration are the definition of “perfect PR professionals” — they are perfect on camera, they know what to say to defend the president’s agenda, and etc.. We see McEnany come into press conferences with her briefing book filled to the maximum, videos to prove the president’s point, and thorough research done on every single one of the president’s statements, no matter how controversial they are. Then there was the press secretary that Nixon appointed, Ron Ziegler, because of his “modest abilities and lack of public stature meshed with Nixon’s desire to diminish the direct impact of the print and electronic media.” This approach towards the media is not the most strategic as “it did not take long for the press corps to determine that the youthful and uninformed Ziegler had no real access to the serious White House information.” With Trump installing some of the best and most loyal communications staff was a smart choice that made sure that his messages were being communicated to the American people effectively. Having a press secretary that is able to defend the president’s messaging without the need of “programming” them, shows that they understand why the president is saying that and why they believe it is best for our country to follow. Although both really disliked the press, being able to play the role of defense is crucial to surviving the intense questioning from the media, and it is something that Jen Psaki and future communications officials should take away. Most importantly, being transparent and honest is what will also allow the communication officials to be trusted while they are on the podium.

Both Nixon and Trump are regarded as infamous and controversial presidents who have set “firsts in history.” Although both Trump and Nixon shared some similar quotes and their populist behavior, Nixon is regarded as an intelligent president who was determined to make his vision become a reality. This is shown through his accomplishments with the Nixon Doctrine, Vietnamization, and with Shuttle Diplomacy. His intricate way of becoming his own PR spokesperson guided him to receiving positive press coverage. He used his power to disallow journalists to record in the oval office, and extended his “honeymoon” phrase, the phrase where the president does not have any criticism against them for the first few months in office, except Nixon’s lasted for about nine months. These were the traits that differentiated him from other presidents, especially Trump, who oftentimes used his business-minded approach and strong personality to tackle obstacles he faced. He brought in the right people to defend his messaging and created the “hottest economy in modern history,” something no other president has yet accomplished. All in all, they both might be similar from the outside, but looking deeper down at their foreign policies and execution, it is not the same way you would expect.