By Months: Raimond Kaljulaid
Total Months: 16
Fully Profiled: 16
10.2025
5 Speeches
The rhetorical style is critical and ironic, employing sarcasm (such as the "Tujurikkuja" sketch) and drawing comparisons to everyday life (the Swedbank client, nostalgia for school years). The speaker poses pointed questions, highlighting the absence of accountability and appealing directly to the perspective of the average Estonian citizen (the parent). The delivery is formal, yet it incorporates emotional and personal notes.
09.2025
40 Speeches
The style is predominantly critical, demanding, and at times sharply polemical, especially concerning the government's inaction and delays ("a great many 'yellow cards' have actually accumulated"). He/She uses both logical arguments (referencing National Audit Office reports and legal deadlines) as well as emotional appeals (discussing the plight of rescuers and those who enter burning buildings). The speaker sharply criticizes political populism and the silo mentality within the Riigikogu (Parliament).
06.2025
7 Speeches
The rhetorical style used in the Riigikogu chamber is formal, yet urgent and critical given the subject matter, especially during the debate on the Competition Act. The speaker employs strong emotional appeals, cautioning against damage to the Riigikogu’s reputation and alluding to the risk of purchased legislation. Simultaneously, the arguments are substantiated by pointing out legal inconsistencies and procedural risks, thereby balancing both logical and emotional forms of persuasion.
05.2025
14 Speeches
The style is predominantly combative, critical, and forceful, especially when addressing the government and the prime minister. Strong accusations ("the wrong thing," "unacceptable") and sports metaphors (yellow/red cards) are used to demand accountability. Logical arguments (deadlines, studies) are balanced by concern for the situation of workers and public trust.
04.2025
1 Speeches
The rhetorical style is formal, serious, and concerned, emphasizing the reality and criticality of the risk being addressed. The speaker employs logical arguments, linking legislative action to the necessity of securing physical resources and funding. The tone is demanding regarding the government's actual readiness and the provision of answers, particularly concerning the ambiguity surrounding the funding.
03.2025
2 Speeches
The style is formal and interrogative, focusing on factual and concrete questions regarding the government's actions. Quotes and previous political precedents are used to support the arguments. Although the tone is generally serious and demanding, the first speech includes a brief personal and ironic introduction ("But we remain friends, all the same!").
02.2025
15 Speeches
The speaker’s style during the foreign policy discussion is sharp and aggressive, criticizing the Foreign Minister’s absence and his "petty" domestic political attack. In the domestic debate, the tone is substantive, solution-oriented, and persuasive, utilizing statistics and references to local government feedback to confirm the gravity of the issue. He employs both moral (the debt of gratitude owed to the Nordic countries) and logical argumentation.
01.2025
3 Speeches
The tone is formal and suitable for a session of the Riigikogu, yet simultaneously sharp and confrontational, particularly when responding to accusations from the opposition. The speaker employs both logical arguments (historical data and statistics) and emotional appeals (such as the question of whether they can look the residents of Southern Estonia in the eye). While emphasizing the need for constructive work, the speaker spends a considerable amount of time criticizing the opponents for their inaction.
12.2024
8 Speeches
The rhetorical style is predominantly combative and sharply critical, employing strong emotional appeals and personal attacks (e.g., "a noisy troll," "pathetic and dumb attention seeking"). The speaker uses logical arguments on the topic of security, but mixes them with frustration over the lack of order in the Riigikogu, accusing the deputy speaker of being incapable of chairing the session.
11.2024
9 Speeches
The style is predominantly confrontational and sharp, particularly when criticizing the opposition, using strong expressions like "not fit to wipe a cat's ass" and accusing opponents of lacking manliness. He balances these emotional attacks with detailed procedural and factual arguments, referencing election platforms and historical examples. The delivery is formal, yet passionate.
10.2024
9 Speeches
The rhetoric is insistent, serious, and at times highly combative, especially in the Riigikogu chamber when discussing procedural matters. He/She employs an existential threat framework to underscore the necessity of defense spending ("we might lose our country"), combining this with detailed statistical data. He/She engages in direct labeling of opponents, calling the opposition's stance "absolutely and entirely populist" and criticizing the session chair's actions as "feeble."
09.2024
5 Speeches
His rhetorical style is formal and detailed when presenting draft legislation, but becomes sharp and direct in political debate. He uses an urgent tone, emphasizing the gravity of the threat and the need to prepare for military conflict. When criticizing the opposition, he is aggressive, accusing them of "populism" and avoiding substantive work, and uses blunt expressions like "failing to clear the bar."
07.2024
3 Speeches
The rhetorical style is highly confrontational, accusatory, and emotional, labeling the events a "complete farce." Strong personal attacks and the dredging up of historical scandals are employed to cast doubt on the opponents' values and integrity. The overall tone is demanding and indicting, insisting on confessions.
06.2024
6 Speeches
The rhetorical style is formal and analytical, often employing acknowledgment and thanks directed even toward the opposing side, sometimes in an ironic context. When criticizing inappropriate solutions, figurative expressions are used, for instance, comparing the draft's impact to lifting four tons of sand with a teaspoon. The importance of consensus and thorough procedure is emphasized, urging against making premature conclusions.
05.2024
3 Speeches
The style is formal and analytical, yet it frequently deploys strong irony and sarcasm, particularly when critiquing political conventions (for instance, the preference shown for a minister’s sheer incompetence). The tone is self-assured and compelling, stressing logical argumentation while simultaneously dismissing the opponents' assertions as nothing more than electioneering rhetoric. Colloquialisms, such as the phrase "don't poke the bear," are introduced only to be subsequently dismantled.
02.2024
4 Speeches
The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and forceful, utilizing historical references (Lennart Meri, 9/11) and relying on logical arguments and statistics (2% target fulfillment rates). The tone is critical of Europe's sluggishness and NATO allies' failure to adhere to agreements, stressing that Europe will not survive without strategic autonomy. When posing questions, the style is pedantic and demands that the presenter possess detailed knowledge of the law.