Close Reading (Oct 21)

Obama Will Do a Better Job

In this article, the author (unknown) attempts to prove to the reader that Obama is the better presidential candidate between him and Romney. The author's first task is to reveal the faults of the Republican candidate, bringing up details about the previous Republican president and the economic crisis that occurred during his presidential term. He continues by taking note of Obama's weak points and redirecting the attacks towards the Republican candidate, choosing his words carefully to best support his perspective. Then, with a vivid metaphor about Romney, he slams the Republican challenger one last time, "sealing the deal," so to speak, in Obama's favor.

In any argumentative discussion, it is important to include ample detailed evidence supporting one's argument. Accordingly, the author of the article provides two long lists of evidence, one against the Republican party and one for Obama. The details he provides are catered specifically for the audience he hopes to persuade. For example, one of the major objects of political debates is the unemployment rate. In an effort to show that the Republicans will not do any better than Obama has, he makes reference to "the nation losing 500,000 jobs in one month" as well as several other negative economic statistics from the period during Republican administration. As far as details about Obama's achievements go, the author only goes in-depth about the positive, brushing off the evidence against the president by saying it is only a matter of time before his policies kick in or shifting the blame onto the "obstinate Republicans in Congress."

The article's author, like any good writer, keeps careful track of word connotation, being sure to apply it in ways that support his position. For example, when talking about the disappointing rate of gain in economic health, he says, "The recovery is slow, but its speed has been hampered by obstinate Republicans in Congress dead set on opposing any program that might boost Obama's reelection." Words like "hampered," "obstinate," "dead set," and "opposing," are used to describe the opposition and all carry, to some degree, negative connotation. Positive words like "recovery" and "boost," however, are used when talking about Obama.

At the climax of the entire article are four words: "No Etch A Sketch." This metaphor is used to criticize Romney's tendency to conform to his audience, changing his image to please the masses. The author carefully picked this comparison both to make Romney out to be what some call "attention whores," and to bring out the audience's childhood frustrations with a toy that claimed to bend to the will of the user, yet always created a distorted image, crushing the imagination in a fit of discouragement. Romney, he says, claims to be the answer to the problems to gain favor, but is unable to give what he promises.

With a strong metaphor, some bolstering diction, and a generous sprinkle of evidence, the author of the article constructs a convincing argument in Obama's favor. Obama may not be the perfect candidate, but he believes that, when compared with the other option, Romney, Obama is most definitely the better choice.