Presupposition in Political Discourse: The Case of Hilary Clinton versus Donald Trump in 2016 United States Presidential Debates

Politicians usually employ the art of rhetoric in order to gain people’s support and persuade them to vote for them. One powerful tool of persuasion is presupposition and I intend to explore how politicians exploit this particular device. Presupposition is considered to be a skillful tool by which people are able to imply meanings without stating them clearly, or present things taken for granted, even if these things simply resemble their ideology and may be questionable (Machin & Mayr; 2012). The focus of the survey is the use of presupposition generally in political speeches, since politics is considered to be a contest for power in order to gain people’s support and vote. Thus, language plays a vital role in it, and since presupposition can be thought of as a useful tool in order to mold people’s ideology, it could not be avoided in political debates. More specifically, this particular paper is based on the political speeches of Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump during the three presidential debates taken place on September 26th 2016, October 9th 2016 and October 19th 2016. By examining how presupposition is applied in political discourse, I expect to be able to illustrate that presupposition is indeed extensively used in politics, provide the way this happens through a critical discourse analysis (CDA) and outline the reasons why presupposition is essential in political speeches.