By Months: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart
Total Months: 19
Fully Profiled: 19
10.2025
20 Speeches
The rhetorical style is highly combative, critical, and accusatory, employing strong negative metaphors such as "tax chaos," "tax circus," and "total clusterfuck." The appeals are a blend of legal logic (constitutional conflicts) and emotional persuasion (families' ability to cope, the danger of driving unsafe vehicles). The tone is sharp and emphasizes the government's negligence.
09.2025
85 Speeches
The speaking style is contentious and forceful: it often employs rhetorical questions, a symbiosis of facts and emotional critique, and magnetizes attention with forceful language, such as "tax circus," "Toompea politics," and "putting it in a drawer." It sounds formal, but at the same time very decisively and sometimes symbolically, following strong data and examples.
06.2025
68 Speeches
Employing a strong, critical, and emotional tone; it combines factual evidence with rhetorical questions, accusations, and repetitive appeals. It often uses consistent opposition and emphasizes the protection of fundamental rights and transparency, while also demonstrating a willingness to cooperate in the name of ultimate goals. The debate has often been heated, and the style is multifaceted – both mentally and argumentatively complex.
05.2025
46 Speeches
The style of speaking is combative and forcefully critical, often employing emotional appeals and reinforcing arguments with small examples and questions. The text is long and thorough, combining facts (Supreme Court, discussion of bills) and highlighting assertions (people's coping, legal certainty). It uses rhetorical questions and narratives like “Pandora's Box,” and uses directly aggressive phrasing regarding opponents.
04.2025
32 Speeches
The emphasis is skilled, critical, and acerbic, employing a style that combines storm warnings and appeals to emotions; it utilizes rhetorical questions, sarcasm, and lengthy, wounding observations and examples (e.g., commentary on Excel spreadsheets, cases from the anti-corruption special commission). Accusations are often presented, and main answers are sought diligently with extreme conviction.
03.2025
19 Speeches
Appropriate and closely supported by facts, yet simultaneously uncompromising and ready for attacks; it uses many questions, emotional loadings, and weighing of facts, which gives the tone a powerful and sometimes accusatory coloring. In the texts, formal language mixes with personal accusations, employing a complex structure and detailed narrative.
02.2025
34 Speeches
A combination of divisive and emotional tone; it uses the form of strong accusations and exclamations (e.g., "criminal," "classified information") and questions that demand an answer. The speech is often aggressively formal, but also contains references to experts and reports, and in the conclusions, it directly addresses the public.
01.2025
39 Speeches
Uses a combination of core arguments with facts and nuances (numbers, historical facts); the tone is critical but willing to cooperate when necessary; presentations are detailed and often empathetic, using evidence that draws attention to ethical and legal standards.
12.2024
25 Speeches
The emphasis is on a critical and norm-challenging tone, frequently employing questions, emotional examples, and a strong narrative. In the texts, formal speech combines with facts and figures, and a political accusation is directed at the coalition, utilizing clear contrasts and comparisons. A well-developed oppositional style is evident, where arguments employ both analytical and moralistic motives, alongside references to a crisis of trust in institutions.
11.2024
34 Speeches
A boldly challenging and emotionally charged style; it combines strong criticism with democratic demands, often employing rhetorical questions and cultural-iconic references (e.g., “an avalanche,” “Louis XIV”). It expects clarity and answers and uses symbols to elevate moral imperatives and draw attention to budgetary transparency and fairness.
10.2024
40 Speeches
It makes frequent use of a strong and challenging style, employing rhetorical questions and direct assertions. It combines factual arguments with emotional appeals and is formal, yet somewhat acerbic and confrontational.
09.2024
20 Speeches
The emphasis is formal, grounded, and yet thoughtfully emotional; it employs questions and rhetorical devices to highlight oppositions and bring the people’s interests to public attention. Texts often contain precise references to laws and procedures, and include personal initiatives as well as expectations of voting. It balances fact-based discussion with empathetic reasoning, sometimes using a note of critical tone.
07.2024
3 Speeches
The speaker is formal, yet combative and principle-based; employs emotional references (the rights of people with disabilities, conventions) and structures arguments on logical foundations and real-life impacts. The tone is firmly critical of the coalition, emphasizing the need to continue the struggle and collaboration with interest groups.
06.2024
39 Speeches
The speaker employs a forceful, direct, and emotional style, frequently using rhetorical questions and imagery; the style is critical and impactful through examples and personal experiences. They combine popular expressions (protection of vulnerable groups) with technical jargon (procedures, lawmaking). They alternate between fact-based argumentation and symbolic rhetoric, which enhances evaluation and emotional impact on audiences.
05.2024
65 Speeches
From the podium, a strongly critical and reasoned tone; uses questions, personal examples, and contrasts the coalition and the opposition. Uses historical references, analogies, and emotionally charged moments (e.g., pay raises for school teachers, support for pensioners) and emphasizes fairness, democratic justice, and transparency. The text's form is formal, but substantial, and often reflects sarcastic or critical keywords regarding the coalition.
04.2024
61 Speeches
A distinctly combative and narrative style, with an emotional tone. Longer lists, questions, and accusations ("hypocrisy," "searching for culprits") are employed, often with personal examples and strong ethical/value-based language. The speech must build step-by-step, utilizing powerful rhetoric and expressions related to criticism (e.g., "highlighting differences," "broken promises"), combining factual and symbolic language. At times, the tone is strikingly aberrant, and the final impact is deeply moving.
03.2024
34 Speeches
The speaking style is tedious and emotionally intense, often employing rhetorical questions and addressing with a respectful tone. A combination of worry- and fact-based argumentation, alongside the use of personal examples (for instance, an Audi 80). Quite decisive and critical, sometimes with irony, but at the same time legally justified and politically forceful.
02.2024
14 Speeches
He typically speaks directly and critically, often using rhetorical questions and numerical evidence. He employs accusatory phrases ("a decision based on an Excel spreadsheet") and emphasizes the lack of impact analysis and regional impact; the style is somewhat combative and emotional, but frequently also fact-based. He uses emphatic expressions, but attempts to keep the debate and responses open.
01.2024
30 Speeches
Critical and emotionally powerful, yet also fact-based and question-driven style. It employs stronger expressions (e.g., demagoguery, hypocrisy) within the context of teachers’ concerns and budget problems; it balances emotion and logical argumentation and pays attention to the broader public interest.