By Plenary Sessions: Anti Poolamets

The style is highly confrontational and emotional, employing powerful ideological and historical analogies to discredit the opponent's views. He accuses the presenter of imposing communist and Soviet planning (Khrushchevkas, panel apartment blocks). The text also utilizes specific real-life examples (the Rakvere vote-buying scandal) and sharp criticism aimed at law enforcement bodies.

The rhetorical style is highly aggressive, accusatory, and moralizing, employing strong emotional expressions such as "audacity," "haughtily," and "terribly embarrassing." The speaker issues direct demands for action rather than seeking logical debate, with the goal of publicly shaming the opponents. Irony is utilized, referencing the ruling parties' lack of a "moral compass."

The rhetorical style is highly combative, emotional, and dramatic, utilizing strong figurative expressions (e.g., "beating a person like a stake into the ground" and "outlaws"). The speaker relies on detailed case studies and personal stories to illustrate systemic failures, emphasizing the tragicomic injustice and the system's ruthlessness. Irony and sarcasm are employed.

The style is critical and direct, employing negative assessments ("quite ugly," "powerless national defense") to describe the actions of the opposing side. Rhetorical questions are used to cast doubt on the feasibility and timeline of defense plans, such as the hope of competently utilizing tanks a decade from now. The tone is primarily logical and fact-based, but it also contains sharp condemnation.

The rhetorical style is highly aggressive, accusatory, and grounded in morality, calling the Prime Minister a "moral corpse" and accusing the coalition of utter shamelessness. The speaker adopts an urgent tone to stress the necessity of quickly resolving security and ethical issues, relying heavily on emotional appeals and historical examples. He employs numerous rhetorical questions and sharp metaphors ("the elephant sits in this box every Wednesday").

The rhetorical style is highly aggressive, accusatory, and moralizing, employing strong emotional terms like "blood money" and "sadistic war." It appeals to national shame, claiming that Estonia has fallen to the level of "banana republics." The discourse is direct and focuses on attacking specific individuals (Kallas, Ossinovski), rather than engaging in abstract political debate.

The rhetorical style is skeptical, questioning, and concerned, contrasting the presenter’s "beautiful, even romantic thoughts" with the harsh reality. The tone is urgent and cautionary, emphasizing the danger of European industry's disintegration. Logical appeals are employed, focusing on data related to costs, stability, and competitiveness (US vs. European energy prices).

The rhetorical style is extremely confrontational, emotional, and accusatory, particularly when dealing with socio-political issues. Strong moral judgments are employed ("shame," "hypocritical," "dystopia"), and there are appeals to security and cultural integrity (with references to terrorism and Sharia law). The discourse is polemical, aimed at ideologically discrediting opponents.

The rhetorical style is confrontational, accusatory, and emotionally charged, especially when addressing social and international topics. Strong emotional appeals are used, linking the management of refugee education to the genocide taking place in Ukraine and the actions of Putin's Russia. The criticism is partially presented in the form of rhetorical questions.

A combative and urgent tone, highlighting the danger posed by recession and inflation. It employs strong ideological connections, comparing the government's "nudging" to the anti-private property stance of the Soviet era and Klaus Schwab's globalist ideas ("You will own nothing and be happy"). The appeals are a mix of emotional concern (pensioners, losing one's home) and specific figures (tax amounts), also utilizing rhetorical questions.