Political rhetoric, often just "rhetoric", refers to political claims and statements that are hyperbole, with little substance.

How to Analyze Political Rhetoric As ordinary citizens, you and I will never have access to insider information, nor have the time or ability to deal with all of the complexities of a political campaign. So, analysis of these basic patterns of persuasion has limited value: it doesn't tell us which side is "right," what charges are true, what supporting evidence is reliable, or what to do. But, such basic pattern analysis does help us to do some basic sorting out -- in a detached and systematic way -- of some very complex emotional arguments: to identify the examples, to recognize past history, and to define the key issues. Many analysts are more sophisticated in analyzing psychological, economic, and social aspects of politics (often about the bad intent of the other, or warning about the bad future consequences of the other). However, just as our awareness of the "little" function words (prepositions, conjunctions) in language is basic to our understanding, so also our awareness of some "simple" basic techniques (repetition, association, composition, omission, diversion, confusion) helps us to understand better. Eventually, a good analysis of political language is a complex, rational activity. Elsewhere (in the Intensify/Downplay schema), I've presented a comprehensive taxonomy, a simple and elegant model, as a useful way to analyze complex communication and persuasion. Basically: when people communicate, we intensify some things and downplay others. The common techniques how we intensify (by means of repetition, association, composition) and how we downplay (by means of omission, diversion, confusion) are elaborated in this comprehensive scheme. This taxonomy is non-directive, to give many options to the analyst, but with a logical cohesion to each other. Thus, whatever you choose for your focus, you'll recognize how your choice relates to the wider context. No two people studying the basic patterns of political language do the same thing. Some may want to emphasize the candidates' formal speeches, others may focus on the spontaneous offhand remarks. Some may be interested in political metaphors (e.g. war, sports, medicine); others in omissions.