Sunday, September 27, 2015
Hillary Clinton
I found this article to be a bit confusing. The title includes “Why being a woman gives Clinton unique insight on economic issues” but I didn’t see any evidence of this. The author gave examples of how Clinton has a unique insight about being a woman in politics talking about her breaking into the boy's club and working her way up when it was nearly impossible. The only direct relation to Clinton and economics in the article is her less than sub par record involving economic issues and her personal affluence. I am also a bit lost with the rhetoric of this article. The author uses many facts involving women in the workforce, including a quotation from Clinton herself: “We’ve gone from 77 cents to 78 cents compared to a dollar [in the gender wage gap]. That’s hardly groundbreaking progress.” The author argues that Clinton should use her apparent unique insight on women’s economic issues to garner votes. This argument is based on facts. I suppose the article’s rhetoric involves logos appeal but I feel like the idea of winning votes over a gender issue appeals to pathos.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I tend to agree with the statements you made in your response. The author does not explain what they state in their title. They gave very little evidence to why she has a unique perspective. Pretty much all they say is that she is at an advantage because she is a women which means nothing.
ReplyDeleteI agree, what the author included in her article didn't exactly correlate with the title she chose for it. She used some logos appeal like the percentage of women living in poverty in comparison to men, while catching my attention, I still didn't see how this statistic related to the point the author was trying to make.
ReplyDeleteI too am confused by the manor in which the article was written. Although not a fan of Hillary Clinton, I see how her values as a woman may be different than a man's. That being said, I don't understand how she is supposed to use those values to bring in votes, and change our economic system. I think even if Clinton was elected, she would not do anything to change the wage gap between men and women. I find the persuasive tactic to be based on emotions, so Clinton can latch her audience on to her values emotionally.
ReplyDelete