This site explores the rhetoric by and surrounding Clinton in her many roles: presidential candidate, senator, advocate, first lady, scapegoat, internet meme, and Secretary of State, among others. Some of our guiding questions include: What factors and rhetoric contribute to the public perception of Clinton in these different roles? How is this rhetoric shaped by the media? By feminists? By antifeminists? By democrats? By her opponent? By Clinton herself? That is, how does she view her own rhetoric or persona as a rhetor?

How does her persona as a rhetor fit with the personas she is assigned by others? How is her historic candidacy shaped by the legacy of women’s rhetoric? Why is the language about female politicians different than about male, particularly as regards to family, feelings, and appearance? How might her downplaying or emphasizing her femininity change or impact her rhetoric?

How consistent is her rhetoric over time? How consistent is her rhetoric over space(s)? Are her changes in stances/rhetorical devices arbitrary or is there a pattern? How might the rhetoric surrounding Clinton change once she is (hopefully) elected president?

How does her rhetoric resonate with the American public? How does her rhetoric resonate globally? What influences Clinton’s success or lack of success: her personal rhetoric or her audiences’? How does her rhetoric influence her opponents’ and critics’ responses? How is her rhetoric influenced by her opponents’ and critics’ responses?

How is a rhetorical studies perspective different from other disciplinary lenses (such as political science) we might use?

And, most of all, what can studying Hillary Clinton at this particular moment teach us about rhetoric?

Image Credit: Thom Taylor