Donald Trump’s tweets have become prevalent in today’s society. Because college students use social media so often, it would be incumbent for the researcher to examine the impact Donald Trump’s tweets might have on these young adults’, civic engagement and how the tweets may be affecting his perceived credibility and expertise. The researcher administered a questionnaire to 350 college students from a private medium sized west coast university using various modified scales examining credibility, expertise and civic engagement. Civic engagement was measured using an adapted version of several civic engagement instruments. The researcher used a correlation analysis to offer answers for the proposed research questions. It was found that Donald Trump’s tweets have a significant positive impact on the way college students perceive him to be credible while also effecting their perception of his level of expertise. The tweets did not indicate a correlation to civic engagement, but further research concluded that specific tweets have the ability to have a significant negative correlation on civic attitudes and behaviors. The correlation analysis also found that there was a significant negative correlation between which form of media students use the most and their civic engagement. A regression analysis was performed to see if the tweets had predicting power on college student perception of his credibility and expertise. The tweets demonstrated predicting power. A regression analysis was done to see if the tweets had predicting power on college student civic engagement; the regression results showed no significant predicting power between the two. These results suggest that tweets from a United States President have a significant influence on how he is perceived to be credible, the perception of his level of expertise and how his tweets may be affecting civic engagement on college campuses.

No description available.

No description available.

This study examines how the attacks of the Capitol and the Brazilian congress, presidential palace and supreme court are framed in three Swedish newspapers. The newspapers are Dagens Nyheter, Svenska Dagbladet and Aftonbladet. Furthermore the two attacks are compared with each other. The study uses a qualitative and comparative method. Framing theory is used as the theoretical framework. The results show that the two attacks have many similarities such as anti democratic values, a rhetoric which endorses violence, power hungry ex-presidents and two countries divided by polarization. There are however differences where the framing of Capitol focuses on the Republican party, Trump’s decay of support and a trigger in the shape of Trump’s 6th january speech. The framing of the attack in Brasília focuses on the attempts of installing a military rule and Bolsonaro’s silence. There is need for further scientifical research to get a broader understanding of the phenomenon.

Sentimentanalys av Twitterinlägg, samt kvantifiering och analys av dess resultat har de senaste decenniet fått enallt större spridning, både i den akademiska världen och i näringslivet. Denna undersökning har som mål attgranska huruvida det är möjligt att bestämma den amerikanska presidentens förtroendesiffror med hjälp av 259774 insamlade Twitterinlägg och ett dataset innehållandes förtroendesiffror för samma tidsperiod sammanställdfrån olika institut som genomför opinionsundersökningar. Potentiella intressenter av studien skulle kunna varavalforskare, lingvister och analytiker på olika institut såsom Gallup. Sentimentvärdet för varje Twitterinlägg bestämdes med hjälp av två olika listor med polaritetsvärdare ord, BPMoch AFINN. Det första är ett egensammansatt lexikon och det andra är ett lexikon framtaget för sentimentanalysinom framförallt sociala medier. Den kvantifierade datan kunde sedan jämföras med de manuellt sammanställdaförtroendesiffrorna från opinionsundersökningarna. Korrelation mellan våra sentimentvärderade Twitterinläggoch referensdatan var väldigt låg, vilket skiljer vår studie från andra liknande studier. Mer generella slutsatserkunde dras vid noggrannare undersökning och tydning av resultatet. Framtida studier bör ta hänsyn till sentimentanalysens ofta väldigt lågt prediktiva förmåga vid utförandet avliknande parametrar som i denna studie, d.v.s. med en värdering som bara returnerar positiva, negativa ellerneutrala resultat. / Sentimentanalysis of tweets, as well as quantification and analys of obtained results, has in the last decadereceived a fair share of attention, both in the academic world and the private sector. This study aims to toexamine whether or not it is possible to accurately assess the approval ratings of the President of the UnitedStates using a dataset containing 259.777 tweets and another where the approval ratings were accumulated overthe same time period from two different polling aggregators. Potential person with interest in this studie couldbe researchers who specialize in election, linguists and analyst at institutes such as Gallup. The sentiment value for each collected tweet was accrued using two different sentimentlexicons, AFINN and theone designed by us BPM. This quantified data could then be compared to the manually aggregated approvalratings. An exact mirroring of the result from the reference data and our own could not be made but moregeneral conclusions could be drawn such as that the general consensus on Twitter seems to be as negative as theapproval ratings.

Thesis advisor: Rosen Valchev / This thesis explores the impact of Donald Trump’s tweets related to China on the financial markets in the United States and China, particularly during the U.S.-China trade war period. The study collects financial variables of interest, including the USC-CNY exchange rate and several stock indices from both countries, at hourly intervals from January 2018 to December 2020, and uses OLS regression models to examine the immediate impact of Trump’s tweets on these variables. The study finds that Trump’s tweets related to China had an immediate impact on several financial variables, including a slight negative impact on the USD-CNY exchange rate, the U.S. stock market (S&P 500), the Chinese A-share stock market (CSI 300), and the U.S. industrials sector (MSCI USA Industrials index). Multiple regression analyses show that the number of tweets has a significant impact on the U.S. stock market and the U.S. industrials sector, while the number of retweets appears to be more market-moving than the number of favorites. The study concludes that Trump’s tweets during the trade war period were perceived by the market as a signal of a potential shift in U.S. trade policy towards China, leading to uncertainty and volatility in the financial markets. / Thesis (BA) — Boston College, 2023. / Submitted to: Boston College. College of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Departmental Honors. / Discipline: Economics.

Thesis advisor: Julia Chuang / In trying to explain the outcome of the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election, many post-election analyses focused on President Trumps’ perceived white working-class base. The idea that President Trump is an advocate for the working-class, though, is up for debate: many scholars have highlighted the ways in which President Trump is more of an advocate for the elite than for the working-class. Given President Trump’s appeal to individuals outside of the working-class, I decided to interview Trump supporters at Boston College—a campus with one of the wealthier student bodies in the nation. In my interviews, I looked for different narrative frames and discourses that my interviewees used in their articulation of their support for President Trump. I found that interviewees drew on parental influences, emphasized the value of hard work, shared narratives of victimization, and more. In addition, I learned about the large network of conservatives at Boston College. Given white working-class tropes surrounding the 2016 Election and stereotypes of college campuses as liberal echo chambers, this paper highlights the presence of conservatism on Boston College’s campus and calls for more research on the topic. / Thesis (BA) — Boston College, 2019. / Submitted to: Boston College. College of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Departmental Honors. / Discipline: Sociology.

In the following thesis, American populism's many manifestations throughout American history as well as its current forms in contemporary politics will be analyzed mainly through the lens of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, who are two prominent political figures that have managed to amass a considerable degree of support. In Trump's case, his populist rhetoric and authoritarian slant has allowed him to garner enough support to ascend to the position of President of the United States of America, arguably one of the most powerful political positions on planet Earth. Current trends such as dissatisfaction amongst the voting constituencies of Democrats and Republicans, rises in authoritarian attitudes amongst voters, neoliberalism, and free trade's implications on the American worker, and more will be analyzed in order to understand the popularity of these two political figures and the populist language they employ in their policies and rhetoric.

On November 9, 2016, Donald Trump was elected President of the United States. No aspect of the campaign was more remarkable than Trump’s rhetoric, which ranged from the candid and unexpected to the crude and incendiary. Now, two years later, his rhetoric—and the reasons for its widespread appeal—remain largely opaque, even under examination from proto-fascist or populist lenses. I seek for a partial account of Trump’s rhetoric using the concept of antinomic rhetoric coupled with the widespread popular perception of him as similar to an internet troll. In short, I believe it is his violation of the conventional standards (nomoi) of rhetoric—his “trolling”— that best explains his remarkable rhetoric. Antinomic rhetoric, as I characterize it here, aims at disruption instead of persuasion and employs deception and aggression instead of shared values and rational proofs. By examining a series of rhetorical exchanges between Trump and Senator Elizabeth Warren, I find evidence that his use of antinomic rhetoric derails conversations, dissolves the standards of rational civic discourse, and draws his opponents into unforced strategic errors. These effects contribute to a chaotic environment where more “ordinary” persuasion can take place on territory more favorable to Trump. I also draw broader inferences about Trump’s use of antinomic rhetoric in rhetorical exchanges other than the ones analyzed here and inquire into what further questions could be asked to deepen our understanding of Trump’s trollery and of antinomic rhetoric in general.

The purpose of this thesis is to examine Donald Trump’s Immigration speech that was held September 1, 2016, in Phoenix, Arizona. The speech was a part of his campaign before he was elected president of America. The focus will be on how Donald Trump represents immigrants and talks about immigration. The research questions are how Donald Trump portrays immigrants and immigration and in what terms immigrants and immigration are argued to be a security risk for the country. The representation of the “Other” and Securitization are the theories that will be applied in the study of the speech. Discourse analysis will be used to find out what his messages are and what his perception of immigration is. The messages are based on the discourses that his language may produce through rhetoric which is the second method. The result of the analysis shows that he takes support from the discourses of “us” and “them”, security and nationalism that is a part of a larger political discourse. Immigrants are rhetorically framed as a security threat by describing them as criminals. He paints the picture of America having an immigration crisis. He mainly uses pathos, as a means of persuasion, to appeal to the audience’s emotions of anger, fear and frustration.