الفهرس 
introductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 129 |  |  |
| | | from | 129 | | |
Abstract
This thesis examines the language of the three debates between President George W. Bush and Democratic Senator John Kerry during the 2004 presidential campaigns.
Adopting the Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)approach, the analysis of the data
indicates that Bush, on the one side, has deliberately and successfully exploited the 11
September incident to play on Americans’ increasing sense of fear in order to get them
vote for him. Beside showing leadership abilities, likeability, and toughness, he is
better than Kerry at articulating principles and morals. On the other side, Senator
Kerry has used his rhetoric to show the points of weakness in Bush’s administration,
e.g., the shameful war on Iraq and job losses. However, he lacks charisma and
resoluteness. People feel that he has no strategy to win the war on terror. In addition,
the analysis attempts to show relations of power and ideology and how the powerful
dominate the weak ones.