The aim of this study was to examine differences and similarities in the news coverage among the presidential candidates Joe Biden and Donald Trump in the presidential election 2020. We also examined how the candidates are framed in the different newspapers. In this study, similarities and differences regarding national variances in news articles from Swedish and American newspapers, also where a important part of the research. We did a qualitative text analysis based on 48 online articles from 6 different newspapers, the 3 largest from each country. The newspapers in question are USA Today, The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times from USA and Aftonbladet, Dagens Nyheter and Expressen from Sweden. The result showed that there were more differences between the two candidates than similarities, in the way they were presented in news media. Donald Trump was often portrayed as the president that had a very harsh tone in his statements, and he was throwing out accusations towards Biden and the Democrats without having any facts to back them up. This made him look rather ignorant and sometimes even dumb. Biden, on the other hand, was portrayed as the one who is more fitting for the role as president, based on the writings about his previous experience, and many of the articles in the analysis portrayed him as a friendly family man. The focus point on both candidates during the election was who was leading the election, who was leading in which state, and how much that specific candidate was winning by. This was a topic that frequently showed up in articles from both countries and they often portrayed the whole election as some kind of contest or game, instead of focusing on what the candidates wanted to do and change about the country. The American newspapers more frequently wrote about the statistics when it came to who was leading the election, and their news coverage wasn't as clear as the Swedish news coverage. The Swedish newspaper often used secondary sources, for example from American newspapers, since they weren't able to be where the election takes place, which means they are re-telling the things that happened during the election. Other than that, there weren't that many differences between the news coverage in the US and Sweden.

During his presidential campaign and throughout his presidency Donald Trump’s dealings with illegal immigration have sparked global controversy. The election of Donald Trump has thus insinuated a debate within the academic field of International Relations and a reoccurring concept within said debate is populism. This thesis includes itself into said debate through considering the empirical case study of the Trump administration’s securitization of illegal immigration. More specifically, it investigates how Trump’s securitizing speech acts fuel populism in the US which challenges discourses of open borders and subsequently affects US-Mexico relations. The thesis analyzes polls to captivate the US’ general population as an audience and applies discourse analysis on speeches held by Donald Trump to grasp how the Trump administration’s securitization of illegal immigration fueled populism in the US. It studies the negative effects of the securitization on US-Mexico relations by examining the reactions of Mexican presidents, members of the Mexican Foreign Relations Department and members of the Mexican senate. It is found that Trump’s rhetoric employed throughout the securitization of illegal immigration fueled authoritarian populism and xenophobic populism in the US which captivates the negative sentiments of the predominantly conservative Republican voters towards illegal immigration. The employed rhetoric subsequently challenged discourses of open borders. The effects of said challenges had negative implications on US-Mexico relations as the investigations of the reactions of the Mexican presidents, the members of the Mexican Foreign Relations Department and the members of the Mexican senate have shown.

Language and discourse can create a space where political decision-making and action is accepted despite its untypical nature. The goal of the study is to un-derstand how political discourse is constructed with the aim of legitimizing ex-traordinary action in relation to the framework of securitization. The study revolves around how and why President Trump discursively attempts to legitimize his order that led to the assassination of Iranian Major General Soleimani, on the 2nd of Jan-uary 2020, by conducting a discourse analysis of two speeches delivered within the first week following the event. The study contributes with insight on the particular case, and shows how Maj. Gen. Soleimani is represented as an irrational terrorist, who posed imminent danger to the American people. The act attempted legitimized is presented as done in the name of ‘security’ which seeks to justify the notion of President Trump ‘breaking free’ of usual procedures. The main conclusions of the study are the presented legitimatization strategies, including the linguistic constella-tion of an existential threat, the allusion of a hypothetical future and the exploitation of emotional trauma. Moreover, the findings uncover that a securitization move has taken place within the analyzed speeches.

The aim of this study is to analyse "Report On The Investigation Into Russian Inerference In The 2016 Presidential Election", or the "Mueller report", and William Barr's summary of the same report by using poststructural critical discourse analysis. This critical analysis aims to examine how their potrayal differ and to analyse what impact that might have had on the political discource surrounding the US Presidency, Russia and the US election. In conclusion they differ quite a bit. While the Mueller report show supstantial evidence of obstruction of justice by Donald Trump, William Barr found that the report completely exonerated him. Attorney General William Barr's summary of the report was the first summary of the report to reach the public. Perhaps his description of the report had an impact on the decision whether to impede Donald Trump after the report came out. What impact did the Mueller report and Barr's summary of the same have on the political discource surrounding the legitimacy of the US election and the US presidency?

The diploma thesis entitled "Image of President Donald Trump in the Czech News Agency" closely examines how the Czech News Agency provided information to the Czech readers about the 45th President of the United States, Donald Trump whose time in office (January 20 2017 until January 20 2021) brought a number of changes and controversies. One of the most notable one to mention are the US withdrawal from The Paris Climate Agreement or the accusation that the Republican president secretly cooperated with Russia before a unanticipated victory in 2016 elections. The research of Trump's media image in the public agency CTK is based on quantitative analysis of topics as well as a qualitative approach to evaluating the tonality of each individual article.

The Transatlantic Trade Investment Partnership (TTIP) was a large trade deal that was negotiated between EU and the US under the years of 2013 and 2019. The negotiations for TTIP started with big expectations for both actors but ended without any succeeded agreement. The purpose of this study is therefore to investigate how this trade deal ended in failure despite the big commitment from these two negotiators.  To achieve this purpose, the study was designed accordingly to the theory of Two-level games. A theory that claims that international agreements depends on the domestic political situation. Focus was for that reason put on identifying changes in the political situation in EU and the US.  The method process tracing was then introduced to help identify these kinds of changes. Based on this method, the study found three possible changes that could have stopped the talks of TTIP: The opposition in EU, Brexit, and Donald Trump. To conclude how these three transformations affected the negotiations, evidence describing these three events was collected and thence tested in different process tracing tests. The results of the process tracing tests found that both Brexit and Trump had affected the talks negatively. Moreover, was the study also able to conclude that trade policy of Donald Trump was the factor that lastly ended the negations of TTIP.

This study is a guide to the performer on practices associated with the trumpet music of Donald Erb. It examines the following solo and duo compositions for trumpet: the as yet unpublished Sonatina for Trumpet and Piano (1954); Four Duets for Trumpets (1960); Diversion for Two for trumpet & percussion (1966); Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (1980); Remembrances for two trumpets (1994); and Dance, You Monster, To My Soft Song for solo trumpet (1998). A history of each composition and information concerning the performers who premiered them are documented. An examination of particular harmonic, melodic and rhythmic elements found frequently in these pieces follow. The pieces are further assessed for difficulty through an investigation of extended technical demands, range, endurance and articulation. Additional discussion focuses on the use of mutes, tempos and dynamics as well as suggestions for the preparation and performance of these works. The dissertation concludes with a review of Donald Erb's legacy as a composer and teacher. A comprehensive discography and complete list of Mr. Erb's compositions are included in appendices.

Loneliness is ubiquitous in the life world of every human being. When the phenomenon is recognised and lived, it can be a positive experience propelling the experiencing person to growth and meaningful relations with others. However, the dread it elicits and the anxiety it engenders in a person may have as a result, a denial that leads to symptoms which can be pathological, such as severe anxiety or depression. Concomitant with this is an inauthentic or false way of being which leads to disconnectedness from others and alienation from the self. This exacerbates the feelings of loneliness. The experiencing person will do almost anything to avoid this as is often seen in man's frenzied daily activity and intellectualisation, denying the affective part of the self. These 'difficult to bear feelings' are often the reason for the experiencing person to seek psychotherapeutic help. The psychotherapeutic dialogue can assist the unfolding of the experience of loneliness and make that which is implicitly known to the patient more explicit. In this way loneliness and inauthentic living can be confronted and alleviated. Because loneliness is a lived phenomenon it cannot be studied through measurement. It can only be understood as it is experienced by the person. For this reason a qualitative, descriptive-dialogic case study research design was chosen for this study. Data for the study was obtained from one long-term psychotherapy patient who provided a rich source of information. Salient themes on the way in which the patient entered into dialogue with the therapist through various phases in the psychotherapeutic process, were extrapolated. These themes were discussed according to some of Winnicott's and Heidegger's concepts, representing the object relations and phenomenological paradigms, respectively. To facilitate the movement from Heidegger's fundamental ontology to an ontic-psychological discourse, relevant concepts from Buber and Binswanger were used. The problems engendered by the denial of loneliness and an inauthentic or false way of being is aptly illustrated in the case in question. Although the understanding and verbalisation of loneliness is painful, it also brings relief. The therapeutic alliance makes the phenomenon in question more accessible to the patient and therefore, makes it a positive experience rather than a ground for dread and anxiety. Loneliness must be confronted and lived. The alleviation of it is only possible through meaningful relationships with others. To have meaningful relationships, where separateness and mutuality are the essence, one must live in a true and authentic manner. / Thesis (D Phil (Psychotherapy))--University of Pretoria, 2007. / Psychology / unrestricted

The purpose of this study is to perform a linguistic analysis of Russian mass media focused on its coverage of the 2016 US presidential election. It will be a corpus-based study, using a corpus as a foundational source for quantitative and qualitative data. This study will use a collection of keywords from the corpus and analyze their contexts as they pertain to Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. This study uses corpus linguistic research tools such as sentence tokenization, Key Words in Context (KWIC), sentiment analysis, word embedding visualization, word-vector math, word frequency lists, and collocate analysis as part of the quantitative analysis. The results of the sentiment analysis and word vector analysis show a moderate bias in the corpus favoring Donald Trump. Additionally, a more in-depth qualitative analysis of sentences containing keywords is performed. A framework using Appraisal Theory is used to examine sample sentences to show how the corpus appraises the candidates. The qualitative analysis shows how many sentences are full of judgment towards Hillary Clinton, positive appraisal of Donald Trump, and attempts to expand positive dialog about Donald Trump, as opposed to a contraction of dialog and expansion of negativity about Hillary Clinton. The predicted Russian geopolitical agenda seeks to demean American politics, positively influence perceptions of Russians towards Vladimir Putin, and support Donald Trump insofar as his policies align with Russia's goals.

In a time of extreme political polarization in America, it is necessary to understand how political attitudes are shaped and how and why political perspectives shift. This study explored political polarization and the search for common ground among American voters in order to evaluate 1) political orientation and associations with current and shifting political attitudes, perceptions, behaviors, and learning; 2) political efficacy and associations with political participation; 3) contributions of individual events, experiences, sources and/or social interactions to shifting political perspectives; and 4) the potential role of observational learning and experiential learning as it relates to political attitudinal change. Through a mixed-methods design, this study utilized both quantitative and qualitative methods in two phases in anticipation of the November 2020 U.S. presidential election. First, a survey was administered nationwide on Facebook in July and August of 2020. Second, a small number of participants that indicated that their political views had shifted during the Trump presidency were interviewed in October 2020 to discover more in-depth responses regarding both the formation and shifts of their political ideologies and attitudes. Quantitative statistical analysis from the survey (n = 1,313) revealed that 1) political orientation was significantly associated with a variety of current and shifting political attitudes, political participation, cognitive perceptions and emotions, social media and news media usage, and learning; and 2) personal and collective political efficacy was significantly associated with increased political participation. Qualitative analysis from the semi-structured interviews (n = 16) utilizing the Framework Method indicated that 1) social interactions with role models and media sources informed shifts in political attitudes, especially in regard to family; 2) deeper understandings of shifting political attitudes emerged when viewed through the observational learning subprocesses of attention, retention, reproduction, and motivation; 3) shifting political attitudes were associated with cognitive perceptions and emotions of partisan ingroups and partisan outgroups; 4) deeper understandings of shifting political attitudes emerged when viewed through the experiential learning stages of returning to the experience, attending to emotions, and re-evaluating the experience; and 5) barriers to shifting political attitudes were related to the cognitive perceptions of reason and emotion, whereas rewards for shifting political attitudes were related to increased political participation and learning. The study’s conclusions reaffirmed that there is widespread political polarization in the United States but that there are certain pathways towards common ground through civility and respect, intentional listening, and through the sharing of personal and emotional stories and lived experiences. Those who did shift their views shared an openness to learning through the observation of role models and sources (e.g., family, friends, mentors or teachers, religious leaders, media) and through reflection on past experiences. Aspects of political common ground were obtained not by agreeing on a contentious issue, but by acknowledging that multiple sides of an argument could be valid. It’s about how we approach the problem rather than how we solve the problem. Political orientation is much more complex than the dichotomous portrayal of left versus right.