When advancing public argument people can utilize a number of tools to get their point across. In the case of the recent cancelation of the DACA legislation there has been a surge in public argument. This phenomenon lends itself to rhetorical analysis of public argument. Analyzing how people advance their argument is crucial for understanding an evolving society. Is Ending DACA the Worst Decision Trump Has Made? by William Finnegan, and Why Your Economic Argument Against Immigration Is Probably Wrong by Benjamin Harris are great examples of how two authors combat the same issue in very different ways. Both authors utilize audience and audience construction in their attempt to persuade. Both recognize that the construction of their audience, as well as the care they give to it is wildly important. They also both use language in very different ways to persuade readers. Finnegan takes a more general, catch all approach to the issue, while Harris aims at a specific …show more content…
This is evident by his brief overview of each issue. Finnegan gives a concise description of his stance on each problem in the hopes of persuading people. His counter-public would be made up of people who oppose his stance and believe that Trump made the right decision by rescinding DACA. The unintended audience is made up of undocumented people. Finnegan is commenting on the negative ramifications of the DACA cancelation, and while he does not directly address undocumented individuals, his article stands with them. His “rhetorical audience” would be liberal leaning, progressives, who agree with his beliefs on this issue (Palczewski et al. 202). His broader public is that of politically minded individuals who wish to learn more about thoughts and opinions on today’s current