Power of Persuasion: Analysis of U.S. Presidents' and European Leaders’ Discourse

Abstract

The paper critically explores the persuasive strategies applied by U.S. Presidents and
European leaders in their public speeches, with a focus on internal and external affairs.
Through corpus-based discourse analysis of speeches delivered over the course of two
decades, this study undertakes a close examination of convergence and divergence of the
rhetorical styles, guided by a synthesized framework consisting of Aristotle's Three
Appeals—ethos, pathos, logos—the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM), and Fairclough's
Three-Dimensional model. Its findings shed light on striking differences in how U.S.
presidents and European leaders approach persuasion, reflecting cultural, political, and
historical influences unique to each context. While U.S. presidents tend to focus on a balance
of ethos, pathos, and logos in their speeches, leaders from Europe tend to focus more on
consensus building and collective identity, guided by their commitment to multilateralism and
institutional cooperation. This study has also brought to light the ways in which each of these
groups have their rhetorical strategies moderated, influenced, or otherwise constrained by
domestic pressures, international diplomacy, and historical legacies. The comparative
approach gives insight into the role of political discourse in the formation of public opinion,
policy guidance, and international relations management.