AnAnalysis of Political Conceptual Metaphors in American Presidential Inaugural Addresses

By relying on the conceptual metaphor theory,after analyzing all American presidential inaugural addresses,the political conceptual metaphors in these speeches are singled out and their political functions are scrutinized.This analysis lifts the veil covering how metaphor works in politics and practically it can be of great help to decipher American politics and cultures.     

State of the Union Addresses and the President's Legislative Success

The State of the Union speech is generally considered a roadmap of the president's legislative program each year, yet little attention has been given to whether it functions as a determinant of the president's legislative success. The primary purpose of this article is to empirically examine the policy content of the message and the link to the president's policy success. In addition, I explore how this relationship is conditioned by the strength of the opposition party and the level of partisanship in Congress. Based on analysis of annual data from 1954–2000, the results indicate the speech has a positive and significant influence on the president's success in domestic policy. While this influence remains significant at low and average levels of partisanship and opposition party strength, it disappears when each factor is at high levels. I conclude with a discussion of how this study relates to previous research on the link between presidential speeches and legislative success.     

The President and the Public: Inaugural Addresses in American History

This article examines presidential inaugural addresses to gain a perspective on the changing relationship between the people and the presidency throughout American political history. The analysis suggests three distinct models of inaugural address—constitutional, party, and plebiscitary—each articulating a different understanding of presidential leadership and the relationship between the presidency and the people. The constitutional presidents see themselves largely as restrained, constitutional officers with a minimal relationship to the people. The party model yields a role for the president which is more tied to the people's will, especially as expressed through party. Even though tied more strongly to the public, party presidents recognize constitutional limits on their roles and powers. Plebiscitary presidents often eschew party affiliation and the guise of constrained constitutional officer, and cast themselves as engines of the American political system fully tied to public opinion. Plebiscitary presidents often make few references to other political actors or to the Constitution. Beyond helping us to better understand the contours of American political development, this analysis challenges the prevalent assumption in studies of the presidency that nineteenth-century presidents were not popular or “public” leaders.     

New Strategies for an Old Medium: The Weekly Radio Addresses of Reagan and Clinton

Charisma is one of the most common explanations for the success of political leaders in obtaining the support of the mass public. Yet authors employing the concept typically begin their analyses by simply assuming the presence of charisma, foregoing more rigorous analyses, including the consideration of alternative explanations for public appeal. Thus, charisma becomes a post hoc attribution, a residual category of explanation that is difficult to evaluate objectively. This article examines the concept of charisma in the context of the American presidency by testing for its consequences, including presidents obtaining unusually high levels of support, support from unusual sources, or especially intense and committed support, or successfully leading public opinion on matters of public policy. I particularly focus on the best-case tests of John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan. Unable to find systematic evidence of some special form of leadership that we might characterize as "charismatic," I conclude that the concept of charisma is neither salvageable analytically nor helpful empirically.     

Fichte and the German Idiom: the Metaphysics of the Addresses to the German Nation

This article argues against the dominant Anglophone and Francophone interpretation of Fichte, which reads him as advancing either a form of ethnic or cultural nationalism. It claims that what is missing from the current reception of Fichte is the essentially philosophical and cosmopolitan character of his nationalism – the fact that the Addresses to the German Nation uses non‐empirical and cosmopolitical concepts to develop and articulate its nationalistic viewpoint. It therefore claims that the notion of a national philosophical idiom that the Addresses present, far from being a screen for its nationalism, is its driving engine. It does this by considering the problems of translating the German locution ist unsers Geschlechts. Consequently, it is claimed that the cosmo‐nationalism of Fichte is not reducible to a set of claims regarding ethnicity or even the empirical world, even if a discourse on the organismic, on what counts as life, irreducibly haunts the Addresses.