This thesis uses Benedict Anderson's theoretical contributions on the topic of national identity and Michel Foucault's contributions toward discourse analysis to perform a discursive analysis of Donald Trump's campaign speeches in which he exploits pre-existing anti-immigration sentiments among certain voters to gain political power. The research question addressed herein is: How has Donald Trump invoked the issue of national security to single out groups of immigrants as threats to U.S. national security, and what conditions exists so that he is able to do so in a way that enlists the support of a sizeable portion of the American public? First, this thesis works to put into context what drove post-World War II immigration in the U.S. to provide insight into what conditions lead to certain groups being encouraged or discouraged from immigrating. Second, I contrast Anderson's concept of nationalism with that of Samuel Huntington, whose idea of nationalism more closely aligns with Trump's nativist sense of national identity. Third, having put the history of U.S. immigration and the concept of national identity into context, I perform a discursive analysis of three of Trump's campaign speeches and tweets that focus on immigration and make problematic his racist, far-right ideology and its purpose toward the de-politicization and de-historicization of immigration as a national security and economic issue. I conclude by reminding the reader that allowing anti-immigrant discourse to become normalized without the burden of proof can lead to curbed freedoms under an authoritarian regime, a direction toward which Trump appears ready and willing to lead the American electorate. / Master of Arts

Since Donald Trump took office there has been split opinions about which foreign policy is led by the President. From his candidacy to his first 2 years in office he has made remarks that can be categorized as falling within the theory of realism, liberalism and populism. This study has been based from the two classical IR-theories realism, liberalism and populism as an unconventional theory aside from IR-theory through an ideology analysis to make sense of which foreign policy is being driven by Trump. The study focuses on two cases: The Middle East and North Korea with security policy in focus. This particular ideology analysis has focused on Trump Twitter account, statements and interviews from news channels and official documents from the White House. This material has been analyzed through ideal types within the two IR-theories and the theory of populism. The results of this study show that Donald Trump falls in within the bounds of realism for the most part based on these cases two cases. But attention is paid to his populist tone and rhetoric and that there is no coherent foreign policy driven in these cases. This much to Trumps outrageous remarks on Twitter and to the media but most of all the contradiction between the president and his own administration. / Sedan Donald Trump intog Vita Huset som USA:s 45:e president har det varit delade meningar kring vilken utrikespolitik som faktiskt förs av Trump. Under hans kandidatur till president och hans första mandatperiod har han uttalat sig både i en ton av realism, liberalism och populism. Denna studie har utgått ifrån de två klassiska IR teorierna realism och liberalism samt populismen som en okonventionell teori inom IR för att genom en ideologianalys försöka få fram vilken utrikespolitik Trump för. Studien inriktar sig på två fall: Mellanöstern och Nordkorea med ett fokus på säkerhetspolitiska aspekter. Ideologianalysen har fokuserat på Trumps Twitterkonto, uttalanden och intervjuer från olika nyhetskällor samt officiella dokument från Vita Huset. Dessa har sedan analyserats genom idealtyper inom de två IR-teorierna samt populismen. Resultatet av studien visar att Donald Trump faller inom kategorin som realist men ett uppmärksammande görs av hans populistiska ton och retorik samt att det inte finns en sammanhängande utrikespolitik på grund av Trumps utspel på Twitter och till media men störst av allt motsägelsen mellan presidenten och hans egen administration.

During recent years, America’s attitude toward immigrants has become increasingly excluding. Previous research shows that it is common for illegal immigration and crime to be related to one another, although research shows that there is no relationship between them. The president of the United States, Donald Trump, is known for dividing the American people from the illegal immigrants. Therefore, this study analyses how Trump portraits the American people and the illegal immigrants. Further, the study analyses how he divides these groups from each other. The study is based on a qualitative content analysis where six speeches made by Trump is analysed. The results of the study show that Trump positively portrays the American people by saying they possess unique values. Unlike this, he portrays the illegal immigrants as people that commit crimes such as murder and sexual crimes. Trump also portraits the two groups by dividing them from each other. He does this by giving a positive picture of the American people at the same time as he gives a negative picture of the illegal immigrants. Further, he divides the groups by creating a feeling of unity between the American people through talking about shared culture, values, and an unique history. / Under de senaste åren har USA:s inställning blivit alltmer exkluderande gentemot immigranter. Tidigare forskning visar att det är vanligt att illegal immigration och brottslighet ställs i relation till varandra trots att forskning visar att det inte finns ett samband däremellan. Amerikas president Donald Trump omtalad för att skapa en uppdelning mellan det amerikanska folket och de illegala immigranterna. I relation till detta analyserar denna studie hur Trump framställer det amerikanska folket och de illegala immigranterna samt hur han separerar grupperna från varandra. Studien är baserad på en kvalitativ innehållsanalys där sex av Trumps tal analyseras. Studiens resultat har visat på att Trump ofta framställer det amerikanska folket på ett positivt sätt genom att säga att deras värderingar är unika. Till skillnad från detta framställs ofta de illegala immigranterna som mördare och sexualförbrytare. Han framställer grupperna även genom att separera dem från varandra genom att ge en positiv bild av det amerikanska folket samtidigt som han ger en negativ bild av de illegala immigranterna. Vidare separerar han grupperna genom att framkalla känslor av gemenskap hos det amerikanska folket genom att tala om att de delar en gemensam kultur, värderingar och historia som är unik.

This bachelor thesis quantitatively researches every tweet Donald Trump has written in february 2017 from his personal Twitter account @realDonaldTrump. This particular period was chosen because it was the first full month that Trump was president of the United States of America. That's why it would be interesting to examine his tweets in his new official role as president. The purpose of this study is to find out how Donald Trump used language and his content on Twitter during his first month as president in 2017. What time during the day Donald Trump published his tweets and how his tweets were received by his readers is also of interest to this study. To do this the study uses theories about power as an interactionfield, representation and encoding and decoding. This study relies on a quantitative content analasis as a method and through it Trumps tweets were gathered, compiled and then given a main and a secondary theme. The themes were negative, positive, neutral, political, personal and other. Besides the main and secondary themes, i counted the number of syllables and words Trump used and also how much response he got on the tweets in the form av replies, retweets and likes. The result shows that Trumps negative and political tweets got the most response, mostly in the form of likes. Words that Trump writes more than others are words like fake, news, and media. the result also showed that most of the words Trump writes on Twitter only contains one or two syllables. / Denna studie har kvantitativt undersökt alla Donald Trumps tweets från februari 2017. Dessa tweets härstammar från Trumps personliga twitterkonto @realDonaldTrump. Perioden valdes på grund av det var den första hela månaden som Donald Trump var USA:s president. Därför var det intressant att se hur Trump twittrade som president. Själva syftet med studien är att utifrån teorier om makt som interaktionsfält, representation och encoding och decoding ta reda på hur Donald Trump språkligt och innehållsligt använde Twitter under den första månaden som president 2017. Av intresse är också vilken tid på dygnet Donald Trump twittrar och hur hans tweets har mottagits av läsarna. Studien utgår från en kvantitativ innehållsanalys som metod och genom den har Trumps tweets sammanställts och kategoriserats upp i huvudteman och underteman, bestående av negativa, positiva, neutrala, politiska, personliga och annat. Utöver huvudteman och underteman räknades även antalet stavelser och ord Trump skrev. Studien analyserade bland annat hur mycket respons Trump fick på sina tweets och responsen han får är i form av reply, retweet och like. Resultatet tyder på att Trumps negativa och politiska tweets får mest respons, främst i form av likes. Det har även undersökts vilka ord Trump skriver mest på Twitter och hur många stavelser de innehåller och i resultatet kom det fram att ord som Trump skriver mycket är fake, news, och media med mera. Trump skriver även majoriteten av sina ord med en eller två stavelser.

This essay provides a comparison of Trump’s rhetoric to fascist and populist ideology through an analysis and politolinguistic framing of the usage of apophasis, mesarchia, and pathos in Trump content spanning the first six months of his candidacy for the 2016 U.S. presidency seat. This account finds that Trump is decidedly Ur-Fascist or populist, and cannot be neither of the two, is likely both Ur-Fascist and populist, and leans more in favor of populist ideology given the analyses undertaken. This account ultimately aims to have supported critical discourse analysis (CDA) and politiolinguistics in support of these approaches as rigorous political tools, and to have encouraged the pursuit of political and civil awareness.

This thesis challenges the assumption that states are rational unitary actors by examining how, in the United States, the personality traits of the president determine whether or not he will choose military intervention when the domestic and international conditions align to render it a possibility. These conditions are filtered through the lens of the president's own cognitive schema, which cannot be purely rational and, moreover, is likely to include a mélange of traits that converge to create a marked preference for action, reinforced and incentivized by the domestic political system. If Bill Clinton provides an example of the interventionist impulse among U.S. presidents in his actions in Bosnia, Barack Obama offers an exception through his restraint in Syria. Today, the Trump presidency raises questions about the likelihood of U.S. involvement in the enduring Syrian Civil War.

In times characterized by globalization and development of international politics Donald Trump became the president of the United States of America. No one knew what impact the new nationalistic movements and Trump’s presidentship would have on globalization and the world. The aim with this essay is to analyze the relationship between globalization as a phenomenon and the nation-state within the frames of Trump’s presidentship. The theories used are nationalism by Ernest Gellner which implies that nationalism started to develop during the industrial revolution and a theory by Manfred Steger which explains the different dimensions of globalization. The method used is a qualitative case study and the material that is being analyzed is Trump’s policies during his presidentship (2017-2019). The analyze shows that Trump and his administration wants to change focus from the world to USA and its people. Trump’s policies shows that he strives to revert USA to become a more industrial Society again where nationalism was common and needed to secure the relationship between people and the State. The conclusions shows that Trump views globalization as something affecting the USA and the nation-state in a negative way. It also shows that Trump chooses to deny the main questions of globalization because he wants the nation-state to remain sovereign.

The 2016 American presidential election sent shockwaves through the world. Hillary Clinton the candidate that most experts predicted where going to win was beaten by a boisterous real estate developer from New York, Donald Trump. The language employed by president Trump both during and after his presidential campaign has been highly controversial, especially with the allusion to different forms of conspiracy theories. This essay investigates how Donald Trump alludes to conspiracy theories in relation to the Mueller investigation.

There has been a recent rise in the use of social media as a platform for political communication. President Donald Trump who is very influential, due in part to his celebrity status as well as his presidential position, has had the power to influence his millions of followers on twitter. For this research, I used a content analysis and comparative analysis approach on eight tweets made by President Donald Trump which targeted Mexican immigration, Maxine Waters, LeBron James, Don Lemon, the National Football League (NFL) national anthem protesters and Elizabeth Warren and three tweets made by Senator Ted Cruz which targeted Mexican immigration. I found that for Mexican immigration, twitter commenters on Trump’s tweets were more prone to agree with him, as opposed to Cruz’s tweets, where his commenters disagreed with him.

The primary purpose of the study was to determine the degree of acceptance of the Trump model by secondary school principals and superintendents. A secondary purpose was to identify from the literature the different roles, responsibilities, duties and expectations for the future public secondary school principal.A questionnaire was designed to determine the degree of acceptance of the Trump model for secondary school principals by selected public secondary school principals and superintendents. The questionnaire was composed of twenty-five multiple choice items. Each item had three possible answers, a concept advanced by Trump and two alternative concepts derived from a review of the literature.The population consisted of all principals of public secondary schools in Indiana with an enrollment of 300 or more, and all superintendents of school districts containing at least one high school with an enrollment of 300 or more. Usable responses were received from 419, or 82.8 percent, of the population.The following conclusions were derived from the findings in the study:1. The principals and superintendents accepted the concepts advanced by Trump more readily than the alternative concepts. Seven Trump concepts were found to have "very high acceptance" among the principals and five Trump concepts were found to have "very high acceptance" among the superintendents. Only one alternative concept was found to have "very high acceptance".2. The principals and superintendents rejected the alternative concepts more readily than the Trump concepts.3. The principals and superintendents tended to agree concerning the future role of the secondary school principal. A significant difference in the responses of the principals and superintendents was found for seven of the twenty-five questionnaire items.4. Principals and superintendents agree that a secondary school principal should give highest priority to the improvement of teaching and learning. However, there is disagreement among principals as well as among superintendents concerning the amount of time that will be devoted to this task by secondary school principals. Nearly as many principals indicated that thirty percent of the time of the principal will be devoted to the task as indicated the seventy-five percent proposed by Trump. Responses of superintendents were distributed in a similar manner.5. Principals and superintendents tended to disagree with the Trump concepts concerning the duties, responsibilities, and training of managerial assistants. Generally, principals and superintendents would not delegate as much authority and as many responsibilities to managerial assistants as Trump proposed. Also, principals and superintendents would require managerial assistants to have training as a principal rather than the unique background of preparation and experience that Trump proposed.The following recommendations were made as a result of the findings:1. Principals and superintendents need to become aware of the value and necessity of special institutes, courses, and workshops which last for several weeks during the school year. Such in-service training should enable principals to work more effectively toward the improvement of instruction and curriculum, to keep abreast of new methods and trends in education, and to learn more effective techniques to long-range educational planning. Professional organizations, colleges, and universities will need to do a more effective job in the future of educating school boards, principals, and superintendents to the need for such in-service training if the principal is to be a knowledgeable instructional leader.2. In the future principals will need to delegate more authority to various assistants in order to have time to function effectively as instructional leaders.