By Months: Jaanus Karilaid
Total Months: 11
Fully Profiled: 11
12.2024
8 Speeches
The rhetorical style is highly combative, sharp, and accusatory, employing strong emotional terminology such as "hypocritical," "deceitful," "hollow," and "absurdly." The speaker focuses on highlighting the contradiction between the opponents' rhetoric and their actions (hypocrisy). The appeals are primarily logical, connecting political decisions (cuts, tax hikes) with direct negative social consequences.
11.2024
11 Speeches
The rhetorical style is combative, critical, and forceful, making extensive use of rhetorical questions and irony (e.g., by referring to "the world's best finance minister"). The speaker stresses the government's indifference and neglect ("they couldn't care less!") and appeals to logic by highlighting political and procedural deficiencies. They employ strong juxtaposition (facts vs. rhetoric, being in power vs. solving problems).
10.2024
5 Speeches
The rhetorical style is highly aggressive, confrontational, and accusatory, especially directed at the government and its ministers. Strong phrases are employed, such as "hollow rhetoric," "hypocritical actions," and the accusation that the government poses a "security threat to Estonia." Emotional and political appeals are favored over logical data analysis, focusing on the opponents' incompetence and broken promises.
09.2024
5 Speeches
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and combative, utilizing powerful metaphors such as "tax chaos," "headless state," and "the generator of circular answers broke down." The speaker combines emotional accusations (lying, indifference toward people's welfare) with detailed procedural and economic arguments to create an urgent and damning tone.
07.2024
6 Speeches
Highly confrontational and critical, employing strong, accusatory terms such as "political chaos," "partisan arrogance," and "flailing." The tone is urgent and demands accountability, relying more on emotional and political accusation than on detailed data analysis, although numbers are mentioned to support the criticism.
06.2024
1 Speeches
The rhetorical style is sharply critical, urgent, and combative, accusing the government of chaos in fiscal policy. Direct addresses and rhetorical questions are used to emphasize the necessity of halting the ongoing reading of the bill. The appeals are primarily logical, focusing on the facts surrounding the government's failures.
05.2024
2 Speeches
The rhetorical style is analytical and interrogative, often aimed at the speaker to facilitate understanding of the opposing side's logic. The tone is critical and challenging, particularly when exposing the opponents' motives (i.e., pandering/vote-fishing). Logical contrasts are employed, and external sources are referenced.
04.2024
13 Speeches
The rhetorical style is sharp, urgent, and confrontational, highlighting the government's inaction and poor quality of work. Strong accusations are employed (e.g., smoothing out the Reform Party's tax hump) and concrete practical examples are repeatedly demanded to prove the necessity of the draft legislation. The speaker utilizes both logical arguments (budget figures) and emotional appeals (do not fear Russia's reaction).
03.2024
1 Speeches
The rhetorical style is formal, addressing both the chairman of the session and the minister, and the tone is one of concern and demand. A logical structure is employed, based on a chronological presentation of facts, which is then followed by a direct question regarding responsibility and delays. The appeal itself is primarily logical and fact-based, relying on information obtained from citizens.
02.2024
4 Speeches
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and urgent, employing sharp phrases like "completely failed" and "lying to the people." The speaker backs up their arguments with specific quotes and sources (the Chamber of Commerce and Industry, a letter from the Reform Party Secretary-General) to underscore the government's dishonesty and chaotic nature. While the tone remains formal, the content is emotionally charged with criticism.
01.2024
3 Speeches
The style is sharply critical, combative, and incisive, contrasting the government's rhetoric and vision with a "blatantly different reality." Both logical arguments regarding procedural deficiencies (the tool of failure to coordinate) and strong emotional accusations of political incivility and lying are employed. The speaker uses direct accusations (e.g., the prime minister's phrase, "we lied") to emphasize political dishonesty.