A Critical Discourse Analysis of the Discursive Strategies Employed in the United States Presidential Debates of 2016

Abstract

This paper analyzes linguistic strategies in the 2016 US presidential debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton using Ruth Wodak's Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA). It investigates how both candidates employed intertextuality and discursive strategies to garner public support. The findings reveal that Clinton emphasized collective aspirations, social justice, and inclusive economic growth, using historical context and personal narratives to build credibility. In contrast, Trump focused on economic challenges, and national security, and portrayed the US as a victim of foreign exploitation. He used hyperbolic language and emotional appeals to highlight economic mismanagement and advocate for restoring America's greatness.