Politicians' Speech Analyzed

Trump vs. Biden 2020 - campaign commercials analyzed:
2020 U.S. presidential nomination acceptance speeches analyzed:

Analyses based in part on the following transcripts of speeches (combined with video of the speeches): 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/20/politics/biden-dnc-speech-transcript/index.html

https://www.c-span.org/video/?473574-3/libertarian-party-presidential-nomination-acceptance-remarks

https://www.npr.org/2020/08/27/901381398/fact-check-trumps-address-to-the-republican-convention-annotated

The following examples of dishonorable speech are from the first 20 minutes of each candidate’s acceptance speech:

Joe Biden - Democratic nominee

“United we can, and will, overcome this season of darkness in America. We will choose hope over fear, facts over fiction, fairness over privilege.” #12 (level 1) implies bad intent – implies Trump chooses fear, fiction, and privilege. Suggested more honorable version: United, I believe we can and will choose to increase the prevalence of hope, facts, and fairness in America.

“Winning it [the election] for the workers who keep this country going, not just the privileged few at the top.” #33 promoting prejudice/hate against the “privileged few.” Suggested more honorable version: Winning it [the election] for everyone, especially the workers who help keep this country going.

“[Winning the election] For all the young people who have known only an America of rising inequity and shrinking opportunity.” #15 promotes victimhood. “They deserve to experience America’s promise in full.” #15 promotes entitlement (“deserve”). Suggested more honorable version: no suggestion.

“He [Trump] will wake up every day believing the job is all about him. Never about you.” #11 misrepresenting reality via the mind reader fallacy. Suggested more honorable version: no suggestion.

“Our current president has failed in his most basic duty to this nation. He failed to protect us. He failed to protect America. And, my fellow Americans, that is unforgivable.” #14 blame without responsibility (of all Americans, to protect themselves and each other), #13 opinion offered as fact – “failed” is not well-defined, nor is “unforgivable” – they are opinions. For example, would 50,000 COVID-19-related deaths instead of 200,000 have been considered not failing and forgivable? The answer will depend on who you ask. Suggested more honorable version: Under our current president, there have been what I believe to be far too many deaths from COVID-19. As the leader of our country, he bears a significant responsibility for this.

Howie Hawkins - Green Party Nominee

“Fortunately, he’s [Trump’s] collapsing in the polls. He’s toast. He’s a loser, and good riddance.” #1 name calling/insults. Suggested more honorable version: Trump has been increasingly falling behind in some polls, and I consider this to be a good thing because I don’t agree with many of his policies and don’t want to see him get re-elected.

Jo Jorgensen - Libertarian nominee

“Let’s be honest, the current American healthcare system isn’t working for anyone.” #10 saying something’s bad without (sincerely) acknowledging the good parts. “Well, that is, anyone other than the wealthy and the well-connected, who always have access, or the billion-dollar insurance companies that bring in new record profits every year.” #20 mocking through sarcasm, #33 promoting prejudice/hate against the wealthy. Suggested more honorable version: The current American healthcare system leaves much room for improvement, I believe. (Then go on to list some of the things you think need improvement, while acknowledging that there are some good aspects of the current system.)

“At the FDA, only those companies with the most money and resources get approval. Once those companies do, they weaponize patents to keep out competitors.” #11 misrepresenting reality through over-simplification – that “only” those companies and no others gain approval, and implying all companies that gain approval “weaponize” patents. Suggested more honorable version: At the FDA, companies with the most money and resources have historically been more likely to gain approval for their drugs. (Note: I have not fact-checked this statement to know if it’s true, but assuming it is, this would be a more honorable version). Some of these companies with FDA-approved drugs have sued competitors on the basis of their patents, which has resulted in some reduction in the number of competing drugs.

Donald Trump - republican nominee

“Our opponents say that redemption for you can only come from giving power to them.” This is likely #7 misrepresenting what someone says. (In his presidential nomination acceptance speech, Biden mentioned the “soul of this nation,” he did not mention individual souls. But Trump does not specify who exactly “our opponents” are, nor what particular statement(s) he may be referring to, so we can’t say for sure – it is still worth applying a “sentence” to this, I believe, due to it being Trump’s responsibility to be more clear so that his representation of particular statements can be independently verified). “This is a tired anthem spoken by every repressive movement throughout history.” #9 comparison to something bad: repressive movements. “But in this country, we don’t look to career politicians for salvation.” #33 promoting prejudice/hate against “career politicians.” “In America, we don’t turn to government to restore our souls; we put our faith in almighty God.” Suggested more honorable version: My opponent has described this election as being part of a “battle for the soul of this nation.” I do not agree with this characterization. (Note: a possible follow-on sentence that would still contain some dishonor – #11 misrepresenting reality by the straw man fallacy, i.e., not refuting the actual meaning behind Biden’s statement – would be: In America, many of us put our faith in almighty God, and look to Him, not our government, for salvation.)

“Joe Biden spent his entire career outsourcing their dreams and the dreams of American workers, offshoring their jobs, opening their borders and sending their sons and daughters to fight in endless foreign wars, wars that never ended.” #14 (level 1) blame – it’s not all Biden’s doing, #10 saying Biden’s doings were bad without acknowledging the good parts. Suggested more honorable version: Joe Biden served our country as a senator or vice-president during times when some companies hired people in other countries to do jobs previously done by American workers, during times when our borders were more open, and during times of foreign wars, and thus bears some responsibility for these things. (Note: some definition or measure of what “open” means should be provided since this vague word could be taken as a negative or a positive in the context of borders.)

“In the Left’s backward view, they do not see America as the most free, just and exceptional nation on earth.” #12 (level 1) declaring someone to have bad beliefs – this is actually a subset of #11 misrepresenting reality through mind reader.Instead, they see a wicked nation that must be punished for its sins.” #11 misrepresenting reality through mind reader (and also #12 (level 1)). Suggested more honorable version: I believe America is the most free, just and exceptional nation on earth, but I do not recollect Democrats often talking about this. Instead, I recall many Democrats talking about certain injustices they say are occurring in America.

"Suggested dishonorability sentences"

Suggested Dishonorability Sentences” & Number of Dishonorable Speech Instances identified in the first 20 minutes of candidates’ speeches:

Biden: 234 “years” from 38 instances

Hawkins: analysis not performed

Jorgensen: 69 “years” from 15 instances

Trump: 174 “years” from 37 instances

(No dishonorable speech was identified for “sentencing” in the first 10 minutes of Trump’s speech. If we take from minute 10 to minute 30, the “sentence” would be 280 “years” from 57 instances.)

Note that Biden’s speech was about 24 and a half minutes long, Jorgensen’s was about 23 minutes long, and Trump’s was about one hour and 10 minutes long. If the entirety of the speeches were analyzed, Biden and Jorgensen’s “suggested dishonorability sentences” would increase a little, while Trump’s would likely at least double.

From these analyses, the most frequently identified dishonorable speech categories were:

For Biden: #11 misrepresenting reality, #12 assuming/implying bad intent, and #15 promoting entitlement/victimhood

For Jorgensen: #10 saying bad without acknowledging good and #11 misrepresenting reality

For Trump: #10 saying bad without acknowledging good, #11 misrepresenting reality, and #33 promoting hate/prejudice

Note: it is planned to have a “Members Only” section of this website at some future time, and for all the dishonorable speech instances involved in the “suggested sentences” above to be identified there.