Graduation Term

Spring 2026

Degree Name

Master of Science (MS)

Department

School of Communication

Committee Chair

Andrew Ventimiglia

Committee Member

John Baldwin

Committee Member

Steve Rahko

Committee Member

Lance Lippert

Abstract

When political coalitions include groups with opposing policy goals, leaders face a challenge: satisfying all constituencies without making commitments that alienate essential supporters. The present study examines strategic ambiguity in the form of deliberately vague political messaging as a tool for managing this challenge. Combining rhetorical analysis with selectorate theory, which explains how leaders achieve and maintain power through reward distribution, the research analyzes Donald Trump’s 2024 Republican National Convention acceptance speech, focusing on immigration rhetoric.

The analysis reveals that Trump’s ambiguity was selective rather than habitual. On immigration, where tech/corporate interests wanting skilled workers clashed with nationalist groups demanding restrictions, the speech used vague language. On energy policy, where both groups agreed, the speech made specific commitments. On issues such as H1-B work visas, the speech was completely silent. When H1-B publicly exploded on the Right in December 2024, Trump’s coalition fractured in exactly a manner consistent with this framework.

The study contributes a theoretical extension: the consideration of symbolic rewards, where identical rhetoric reaches all audiences, but each group extracts different meaning, allowing leaders to satisfy contradictory constituencies without concrete policy commitments.

Access Type

Thesis-Open Access

Download

Share

COinS