What does it sound like when a man chosen by god—or so he says—addresses a nation of misinformed citizens? Forty-fifth and forty-seventh President of the United States of America Donald Trump delivered his second inaugural address on Monday, January 20th, 2025, a day that just so happens to be the national holiday recognizing the work of Martin Luther King Jr. Through an extensive series of implications and direct references, Mr. Trump illuminates himself to be the man who will save the United States from the desperate state it is in. All of these points, and others, combined to create a speech filled with lies or unproven statements, misleading information, and frightening declarations of power. As much as I would like to disprove this and reveal the truth of the situation, that is not the purpose of this essay. The purpose, instead, is to analyze how he makes himself look smarter, more powerful, and more grand than he is.

The frightening thing about the use of logical appeal in President Trump’s inauguration speech is that much of what someone supporting him would consider logic is not founded on whole facts. Much of the second half of the speech consists of references to perceived issues within and outside of United States borders. One of his main points of contention in this speech, across the campaign trail, and historically has been illegal immigration. With many of his supporters agreeing that it is a larger issue than he makes it out to be, it is fair to deem this as a logical appeal to those he is speaking to. Following a similar blueprint, he makes the same sort of remarks about disaster relief, public health, and education. In appealing to this so-called logic, he successfully rallies those who subscribe to his views. 

In addition, to ‘fact,’ he includes claims of divine nature that would be logical to a wide portion of his support base. When referencing the assassination attempt at his rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, he says “I was saved by God to make America great again.” This, in a way, says that he was chosen by God to lead our country. Seeing as much of his support base is Christian or Catholic, this is an appeal to their logic as well. 

One way that President Trump escapes scrutiny or dealing with absolutes is by using ambiguous language such as ‘many,’ ‘most,’ or ‘some,’ which allows for a large gray area between fact and fiction. This works to empower the appeals to logic because it expands the base of people who might believe what he is saying by providing a wider area of coverage for those ‘statistics.’ Through understanding his audience and using clever descriptions, President Trump navigates logical appeal to empower those who refuse to question his words and those who already support him.

Although true logic is not his strong suit, pathos, or emotional appeal, is something he does dangerously well. In this speech, he links together multitudes of topics under the guise of patriotism, nationalism, and what he and his supporters think is unity. Each of these holds strong ties to emotion and attachment, made evident by the dedication to protecting the country that typical conservatives have. There begins the inextricable link between nationalism, American exceptionalism, and military spending. I make this connection because it is important to acknowledge the passion with which people regard their topics or issues of interest. With that groundwork laid, it is easy to see how he uses these talking points to create reactions from the audience. The issue, then, is that liberals or those who simply disagree do not have the same passion for those topics. That goes to show how well-targeted his speech is to the passions of those he knows will support him. 

Not only are his talking points well targeted, but Trump is well-known for using exaggerative language, often to the effect of getting reactions out of the audience, for better or for worse. That trend continued in this speech with him saying things like, “vicious, violent, and unfair weaponization” in reference to the many legal troubles he has found himself in at the hands of the federal government. There are many other examples in this speech that are essentially extensions of points he has made throughout the campaigning process and in the past. To emphasize his words, he employed a confrontational tone befitting the themes of exceptionalism and nationalism mentioned before. Through inflammatory language and clever navigation across topics that invoke passion among his supporters, President Trump makes it appear as though he has more support than he might otherwise have.

I find it difficult to even venture towards ethical appeal in this context because many of the topics he discusses are so patently false or regarding issues long departed from ethics. American national security has more often than not come at the cost of human beings in every other part of the world. Assertions of power and neglect for human life are rarely ethical. This neglect extends to issues of illegal immigration, the Second Amendment, reproductive rights, and LGBTQIA+ rights, all of which he has taken similar stances on. Nevertheless, the same passion bleeds into these issues as do the points of American exceptionalism from him and his supporters, making hate and neglect seem ethical to a large portion of Americans. Despite what conservatives had people believe about the poor character of many liberal figures, past and present, their movement is now spearheaded by a man who defies all definitions of ethics, personally and politically. 

One point that was intentionally left out of the list above is civil rights, and that is because he made a specific point to mention the different demographics who are “rapidly unifying behind our agenda.” Not only did his language make it seem as though he won in a landslide, but he made a specific effort to acknowledge demographics he actively sought, and still seeks, to disenfranchise. Trump and Vance’s victory in this election was one of the tightest popular vote victories ever, but he did win the electoral vote quite convincingly due to winning each swing state. Not stated in this speech but often outside of it is his policy of doing away with diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives that seek to do exactly what he says he wants to do. Doubling down on that, he said that “in [Martin Luther King Jr.’s] honor we will strive together to make his dream a reality.” If the contradictions were not obvious enough already, they should be. For a man who is in the running for the most powerful in the world, you would think that he would be the most well-informed. Seeing as this is not true, I and others are forced to see each thing he says as intentional.

Many leaders of the past, none of them good, have exploited an undereducated—or intentionally misled—population to rise to power, employing various methods and issues relevant to the times. A common denominator of all such societies is a scapegoat population, for example, the Jewish for Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party. The rhetoric that each of these groups employs is also similar in that they exaggerate issues or successes to look larger than they are. Trump’s use of exaggerative language, a lack of facts, and navigation around glaring issues mirrors this theme closely. In a world with near-unlimited access to information, practically boundless connection to every point on the globe, and the ability to create nearly anything we want it is both easy to manipulate people and break said manipulation. All I and those negatively affected by the rhetoric and policy outlined here ask is that you work harder to inform yourself accurately.

I will leave you with two quotes to ponder as you go about your day:

“The truth is that the State in which the rulers are most reluctant to govern is always the best and most quietly governed, and the State in which they are most eager, the worst.” (Plato, The Republic, Book VII) This is to say that those who seek power are the most unfit to do so, and those who rule due to circumstance or duty are the most fit.

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." (George Orwell, 1984)

Copyright 2024, Cole Johnson. All rights reserved.  May not be used (for any reason other than personal reading by the downloader), distributed, reproduced, or sold in whole or in part without express written permission by the author.