In her article on the 28th of October called "America's Political Pendulum Swings to the Right", Kathleen Parker, an opinion writer for the washington Post, asserts that this election year, the Republicans are more likely to win, but that no matter who wins, it should be about running the country as best as possible. Her indictment is supported by facts of previous elections, and historical examples. Parker suggests that no matter which way the pendulum swings this election year, it should be about making America better, and setting aside differences in order to get her readers interested in the next president, and their futures. The audience consists of adults who are old enough to vote, and the politicians that might run this year.
The author gains credibility by being a simple citizen herself. Most Americans don't really care whether Republicans or Democrats take office as long as America is run constitutionally. She asserts that "May the victors, both Democrat and Republican, remember this fact and keep it close to their conscience" suggesting that she does not care as long as she, and her fellow citizens are treated fairly. Her piece is convincing to both parties, and simple citizens because she does not favor either side of the political parties, but chooses to be neutral, pointing out the faults of both parties equally. I think that this piece is well-researched because she puts into reference past historical elections and the turn of events. The author presents a balanced view by claiming that it would be nice "republicans indeed take charge, if they would skip the hubris course and buckle down with their Democratic counterparts", and doing the same thing to the Democratic side.
The author presents an emotional effect of hope and caution. She urges her readers to care about the upcoming election because the way that the pendulum swings matters, but not the point of threatening their liberties. She says to be cautious because " Republicans are too smart to celebrate, yet, and Democrats, ever saddled with hope" because even though the way the pendulum swings does not matter as much, the important thing is the integrity of the new President. She says that we should be like those who "drummed their fingers to nubs waiting for Election Day as Brits do a royal birth." because those are the smart people who are aware of the importance of election day.
The columnist appeals to her audience of people with voting abilities by saying not be affected by political party, but be affected by good of heart. Her use of diction saying "hope-and-change formula that catapulted a relative unknown into the presidency has lost its magic" asserts that what has worked in the past will not work any longer. The basic fundamentals of a good election comes down to the nominees, disregarding their political parties. She alsu uses ethical appeal when saying "we the people" and putting herself among the masses. This is also a form of allusion to the constitution something they all share in common.
I noticed that the author uses a tone of humor to make herself relatable. I have realized the true importance of voting on "our future and the future of our children" and that the parties are interchanging and disregarding previous values.
The author gains credibility by being a simple citizen herself. Most Americans don't really care whether Republicans or Democrats take office as long as America is run constitutionally. She asserts that "May the victors, both Democrat and Republican, remember this fact and keep it close to their conscience" suggesting that she does not care as long as she, and her fellow citizens are treated fairly. Her piece is convincing to both parties, and simple citizens because she does not favor either side of the political parties, but chooses to be neutral, pointing out the faults of both parties equally. I think that this piece is well-researched because she puts into reference past historical elections and the turn of events. The author presents a balanced view by claiming that it would be nice "republicans indeed take charge, if they would skip the hubris course and buckle down with their Democratic counterparts", and doing the same thing to the Democratic side.
The author presents an emotional effect of hope and caution. She urges her readers to care about the upcoming election because the way that the pendulum swings matters, but not the point of threatening their liberties. She says to be cautious because " Republicans are too smart to celebrate, yet, and Democrats, ever saddled with hope" because even though the way the pendulum swings does not matter as much, the important thing is the integrity of the new President. She says that we should be like those who "drummed their fingers to nubs waiting for Election Day as Brits do a royal birth." because those are the smart people who are aware of the importance of election day.
The columnist appeals to her audience of people with voting abilities by saying not be affected by political party, but be affected by good of heart. Her use of diction saying "hope-and-change formula that catapulted a relative unknown into the presidency has lost its magic" asserts that what has worked in the past will not work any longer. The basic fundamentals of a good election comes down to the nominees, disregarding their political parties. She alsu uses ethical appeal when saying "we the people" and putting herself among the masses. This is also a form of allusion to the constitution something they all share in common.
I noticed that the author uses a tone of humor to make herself relatable. I have realized the true importance of voting on "our future and the future of our children" and that the parties are interchanging and disregarding previous values.