1887
image of Political communication in U. S. Senate campaign victory and concession speeches
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This qualitative study investigates how candidates for the U.S. Senate make persuasive use of interactional techniques and strategies in victory and concession speeches to manage impressions and create positive presentations of self as candidates, politicians, and persons. The analysis shows how concessions and victory claims are constructed, how concession phone calls to the winning candidate are described, and how candidates manage audience responses to references to these issues in the concession or victory speeches. Given political polarization and division in current U. S. politics, better understanding of political communication in victory and concession speeches may be useful for analytical and practical purposes, and may also provide a foundation for future studies of shifting norms for this genre of political communication.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ld.00222.gar
2026-04-09
2026-05-11
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Antaki, Charles
    (ed.) 2011Applied Conversation Analysis: Intervention and Change in Institutional Talk. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave McMillan. 10.1057/9780230316874
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230316874 [Google Scholar]
  2. Arminen, Ilkka
    2017Institutional Interaction: Studies of Talk at Work. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate. 10.4324/9781315252209
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315252209 [Google Scholar]
  3. Benoit, William L.
    2016 “Barack Obama’s 2008 Speech on Reverend Wright: Defending Self and Others.” Public Relations Review(): –. 10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.09.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.09.003 [Google Scholar]
  4. Fitzgerald, Richard and William Housley
    2015Advances in Membership Categorisation Analysis. Los Angeles: Sage. 10.4135/9781473917873
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473917873 [Google Scholar]
  5. Garcia, Angela C.
    2021 “The Types and Functions of Humor in the Work of a United States Senator: A Case Study of Senator Edward Kennedy.” Language and Dialogue(): –. 10.1075/ld.00095.gar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.00095.gar [Google Scholar]
  6. 2023aAn Introduction to Interaction: Understanding Talk in the Workplace and Everyday Life, second edition. London: Bloomsbury Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 2023b “An Interactional Study of How Religion is Used in U.S. Senate Campaign Speeches.” Paper presented at theAmerican Sociological Association annual meetings, August 19, 2023, Philadelphia.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 2024 “Crisis Negotiation Techniques in Interactional Context: Managing a Suicide Threat in an Emergency Service Call.” Qualitative Health Communication(): –. 10.7146/qhc.142862
    https://doi.org/10.7146/qhc.142862 [Google Scholar]
  9. Garcia, Angela C. and Erik Cleven
    2024 “How Reflection Works in Transformative Dialogue/Mediation: A Preliminary Investigation.” Qualitative Sociology Review(): –. 10.18778/1733‑8077.20.2.05
    https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.20.2.05 [Google Scholar]
  10. Garfinkel, Harold
    1967Studies in Ethnomethodology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Goffman, Erving
    1959The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City, New York: Doubleday.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. 1967Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. Garden City, New York: Doubleday.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 1974Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Hart, Roderick P. and Colene J. Lind
    2010 “Words and Their Ways in Campaign ’08.” American Behavioral Scientist(): –. 10.1177/0002764210381712
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764210381712 [Google Scholar]
  15. Hayden, Jessica M., Matthew J. Geras, Nathan M. Gerth, and Michael H. Crespin
    2017 “Land, Wood, Water, and Space: Senator Robert S. Kerr, Congress, and Selling the Space Race to the American Public.” Social Science Quarterly(): –. 10.1111/ssqu.12471
    https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12471 [Google Scholar]
  16. Heritage, John and Steven E. Clayman
    2010Talk in Action: Interactions, Identities, and Institutions. Boston: Wiley Blackwell. 10.1002/9781444318135
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444318135 [Google Scholar]
  17. Hester, Stephen and Peter Eglin
    (eds) 1997Culture in Action: Studies in Membership Categorization Analysis. Washington, D.C.: International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis and University Press of America.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Hutchby, Ian and Robin Wooffitt
    2008Conversation Analysis, 2nd ed. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Jefferson, Gail
    2004 “Glossary of Transcript Symbols with an Introduction.” InConversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation, ed. byGene H. Lerner, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.125.05jef
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.125.05jef [Google Scholar]
  20. Liddicoat, Anthony J.
    2021An Introduction to Conversation Analysis, 3rd ed. London: Bloomsbury Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. McHoul, Alec W.
    1990 “The Organization of Repair in Classroom Talk.” Language in Society(): –. 10.1017/S004740450001455X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S004740450001455X [Google Scholar]
  22. 2007 “‘Killers’ and ‘friendlies’: Names can hurt me.” Social Identities(): –. 10.1080/13504630701459131
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13504630701459131 [Google Scholar]
  23. Mirer, Michael L. and Leticia Bode
    2015 “Tweeting in Defeat: How Candidates Concede and Claim Victory in 140 Characters.” New Media & Society(): –. 10.1177/1461444813505364
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813505364 [Google Scholar]
  24. Mondada, Lorenza and Anssi Peräkylä
    2023New Perspectives on Goffman in Language and Interaction: Body, Participation and the Self. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781003094111
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003094111 [Google Scholar]
  25. Pillet-Shore, Danielle
    2024 “Where the Action Is: Positioning Matters in Interaction.” InThe Cambridge Handbook of Methods in Conversation Analysis, ed. byJeffrey D. Robinson, Rebecca Clift, Kobin H. Kendrick, and Chase W. Raymond, –. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108936583.021
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108936583.021 [Google Scholar]
  26. Sacks, Harvey
    1972 “On the Analyzability of Stories Told by Children.” InDirections in Sociolinguistics, ed. byJohn J. Gumperz and Dell Hymes, –. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. 1992Lectures on Conversation, Volumes I and II. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Salter, Charles, Diana Hargrove, Phyllis A. Duncan, Dan Coleman, and Mark Woodhull
    2017 “Do Emergent Leaders Speak Transformational Language: A Study of the Language and Non-Verbal Behavior of Donald Trump and Senator Ted Cruz Announcement for Candidacy Speeches.” Journal of Leadership, Accountability & Ethics(): –.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    2007Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis, Volume 1. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511791208
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208 [Google Scholar]
  30. Schegloff, Emanuel A., Gail Jefferson, and Harvey Sacks
    1977 “The Preference for Self-Correction in the Organization of Repair in Conversation.” Language(): –. 10.2307/413107
    https://doi.org/10.2307/413107 [Google Scholar]
  31. Sidnell, Jack
    2010Conversation Analysis: An Introduction. Oxford, UK: Wiley Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Stokoe, Elizabeth
    2012 “Moving Forward with Membership Categorization Analysis: Methods for Systematic Analysis.” Discourse Studies(): –. 10.1177/1461445612441534
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445612441534 [Google Scholar]
  33. ten Have, Paul
    2007Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide. Los Angeles, CA: Sage. 10.4135/9781849208895
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849208895 [Google Scholar]
  34. Weaver, Ruth A.
    1982 “Acknowledgment of Victory and Defeat: The Reciprocal Ritual.” Central States Speech Journal(): –. 10.1080/10510978209388454
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10510978209388454 [Google Scholar]
  35. Weigand, Edda
    2008 “Rhetoric in the Mixed Game.” InDialogue and Rhetoric, ed. byEdda Weigand, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ds.2.03wei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.2.03wei [Google Scholar]
  36. 2010Dialogue: The Mixed Game. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ds.10
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.10 [Google Scholar]
  37. 2023 “Principles of New Science: Dialogue between Science and Philosophy.” Language and Dialogue(): –. 10.1075/ld.00142.wei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.00142.wei [Google Scholar]
  38. Whitehead, Kevin A., Elizabeth Stokoe, and Geoffrey Raymond
    2025Categories in Social Interaction. Oxon, UK and New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Willyard, Jennifer and Kurt Ritter
    2005 “Election 2004 Concession and Victory Speeches: The Influence of Genre, Context, and Speaker on Addresses by Presidential and Vice Presidential Candidates.” American Behavioral Scientist(): –. 10.1177/0002764205279439
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764205279439 [Google Scholar]
  40. Booker, Charles
    . Democratic loser 2022 (againstRand Paul)
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Booker, Cory
    . Democratic Victor 2013 (againstSteve Lonegan)
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Brown, Scott
    . Republican Loser 2012 (againstElizabeth Warren)
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Clinton, Hilary
    . Democratic victor 2000 (againstRick Lazio)
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Collins, Susan
    . Republican victor 2020 (againstSarah Gideon)
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Cotton, Tom
    . Republican victor 2014 (againstMark Pryor)
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Cruz, Ted
    . Republican victor 2018 (againstBeto O’Rourke)
    [Google Scholar]
  47. D’Amato, Alfonse
    . Republican loser 1998 (against Schumer)
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Demings, Val
    . Democratic loser 2022 (againstMark Rubio)
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Duckworth, Tammy
    . Democratic victor 2016 (againstMark Kirk)
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Ernst, Joni
    . Republican victor 2020 (againstTheresa Greenfield)
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Fetterman, John
    . Democratic victor 2022 (againstMehmet Oz)
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Gideon, Sarah
    . Democratic loser 2020 (againstSusan Collins)
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Greenfield, Theresa
    . Democratic loser 2020 (againstJoni Ernst)
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Hagan, Kay
    . Democratic loser 2014 (againstThom Tillis)
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Jones, Doug
    . Democratic victor 2017 (againstRoy Moore)
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Kelly, Mark
    . Democratic victor 2020 (againstMartha McSally)
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Kirk, Mark
    . Republican loser 2016 (againstTammy Duckworth)
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Kirkpatrick, Ann
    . Democratic loser 2016 (againstJohn McCain)
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Lazio, Rick
    . Republican loser 2000 (againstHilary Clinton)
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Lonegan, Steve
    . Republican loser 2013 (againstCory Booker)
    [Google Scholar]
  61. McCain, John
    . Republican victor 2016 (againstAnn Kirkpatrick)
    [Google Scholar]
  62. McConnell, Mitch
    . Republican victor 2020 (againstAmy McGrath)
    [Google Scholar]
  63. McGrath, Amy
    . Democratic loser 2020 (againstMitch McConnell)
    [Google Scholar]
  64. McSally, Martha
    . Republican loser 2020 (againstMark Kelly)
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Moore, Roy
    . Republican loser 2017 (againstDoug Jones)
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Nelson, Bill
    . Democratic loser 2018 (againstRick Scott)
    [Google Scholar]
  67. O’Rourke, Beto
    . Democratic loser 2018 (againstTed Cruz)
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Oz, Mehmet
    . Republican loser 2022 (againstJohn Fetterman)
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Paul, Rand
    . Republican victor 2022 (againstCharles Booker)
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Pryor, Mark
    . Democratic loser 2014 (againstTom Cotton)
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Rubio, Mark
    . Republican victor 2022 (againstVal Demings)
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Schumer, Chuck
    . Democratic victor 1998 (againstD’Amato)
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Scott, Rick
    . Republican victor 2018 (againstBill Nelson)
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Tillis, Thom
    . Republican victor 2014 (againstKay Hagan)
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Walker, Hershel
    . Republican loser 2022 (againstRaphael Warnock)
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Warnock, Raphael
    . Democratic victor 2022 (againstHerschel Walker)
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Warren, Elizabeth
    . Democratic victor 2012 (againstScott Brown)
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/ld.00222.gar
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error