Rhetorical question strategies in electoral debates : an analysis of United States and Hong Kong political discourse

Abstract

Televised debates are a particularly important part of election campaigns since they give voters an opportunity to compare the candidates by evaluating their performance in a more spontaneous manner as they discuss issues and respond to questions on the same topics as they interact with their political opponents (Benoit & Hansen, 2004). Given the wide coverage of televised election debates, candidates pay attention to establishing a positive relationship with the general public and make efforts to project an image of themselves as serious and reliable leaders, not only through their appearance but also their style of speaking (Allan 1998; Coupland 2001). In the debates, candidates often do more than promote themselves and their policies, and they often engage in face-threatening acts by challenging or criticizing their political rivals. A frequently used strategy, which has received considerable attention in the studies of political discourse, is the rhetorical question. It is described as one of the most substantial rhetorical means in terms of "rhetoric and demagogy" (Ephratt, 2007:1922), and performs in a way that may be difficult for others to attribute only one clear communicative intention to its act (Brown & Levinson, 1987: pp. 211). Taking cross-linguistic and cross-cultural perspectives, this study aims to conduct a comparative analysis of electoral debates belonging to two different locations - the 2012 and 2016 US Presidential debates, and 2012 and 2017 HK Chief Executive Election debates. The goal is to elucidate the interplay between politicians' use of rhetorical questions and the different contextual factors stemming from different electoral systems. Through these analyses, we will also see how politicians often strategize and compete against each other through the use of rhetorical questions to enhance the persuasiveness of their political messages and criticize their political rivals using demagogic rhetoric as they seek to win the general public's favour.