By Months: Riina Solman

The rhetorical style is initially questioning and concerned, later becoming sharply critical and confrontational towards the minister. Both emotional appeals (children's mental health, concern, disappointment) and logical and procedural arguments (lack of analysis, body of knowledge/expertise) are employed. The speaker expresses disappointment regarding the minister's self-confidence and unwillingness to listen to others, using the figurative expression, "self-confidence has completely flared up."

The rhetorical style is predominantly confrontational and demanding, especially toward ministers, requiring them to answer the questions asked, rather than just saying what they want to say. The tone is often urgent and concerned, particularly regarding family policy, where the significance of every lost second is emphasized. The language employs both emotional appeals (such as 'sending a warm signal to families') and direct, colloquial expressions (referencing an uncensored word, or accusing the minister in a 'pot calling the kettle black' situation).

The rhetorical style is sharply critical, accusatory, and forceful, employing strong emotional appeals (poverty, suffering in care homes) while simultaneously referencing specific figures (a billion euros in tax hikes). It frequently uses contrast and accuses the government of "sleight of hand" and "lying," and the foreign minister of "arrogant and condescending" behavior. The style is formal but also includes ironic remarks (e.g., the grilling of Võrklaev, the ERJK bill).

The style is predominantly critical, serious, and pressing, especially concerning the government's actions and its lack of accountability. The speaker employs strong emotional appeals (for instance, when describing the Pihlakodu incident and the poverty faced by the elderly) and contrasts "honesty" and "substantive answers" with the Reform Party's "sloganeering" and "smoke and mirrors." He/She favors detailed policy analysis over simple rhetoric, but also utilizes sharp political accusations ("jokk," "inhumane").

The speaker's style is often urgent and confrontational, especially directed at the Prime Minister, who is accused of lying and attempting to humiliate female politicians. He/She balances emotional appeals (child poverty, going to bed hungry) with detailed political and technical arguments (energy policy, the tax bracket issue). Despite the formal setting of the Riigikogu (Parliament), the rhetoric is at times personally aggressive and accusatory.

The rhetorical style is predominantly critical and insistent, employing strong emotional appeals, especially concerning families and the birth rate crisis ("men come with tears in their eyes"). The speaker is confrontational at the Riigikogu (Parliament) podium, demanding honesty from the government and accusing them of hypocrisy and arrogance. He/She often contrasts the government's "broad-based" approach with the necessary "focused" action, and employs sharp personal attacks by quoting the former prime minister's lies.

The rhetorical style is predominantly combative, urgent, and passionate, especially when dealing with issues of security and national values. It employs strong emotional appeals, referencing historical events (the Ingrian Finns, the 2007 Bronze Night crisis) and accusing opponents of naivety, outright falsehoods, or unethical behavior. The speaker often uses rhetorical questions and emphasizes the duty of loyalty owed to the Estonian state.

The tone is predominantly critical, concerned, and accusatory, particularly regarding the government's arrogant conduct and lack of political culture. It employs emotional appeals (referencing the "cries for help" from families with many children) and contrasts the opposition's integrity with the coalition's "steamroller" tactics. The style is formal, but it contains sharp personal and ideological criticism.