Abstract:
Politicians use different types of language to control and direct the way the electorate perceive political
issues. The most commonly used is propaganda techniques. This work examined two techniques, Fear mongering
and appeal to the name of God in the presidential debate of 2013. It sought to establish how they were used by
candidates to validate their desirability to voters. The research was based on the Critical Discourse Analysis theory.
The data was collected from statements that fitted in the category of fear mongering and appeal to the name of God.
The analysis applied the knowledge of three approaches: qualitative, critical and content analysis. Results showed
that there was the use of fear mongering and appeal to the name of God as propaganda techniques in the debate.
The techniques were used by candidates for self praise, to malign opponents and to protect themselves from any
malignment. They were also used with the intention of scaring voters against voting for certain candidates and
positioning themselves as the right candidates. This work is a significant contribution to the study of Discourse
Analysis and political communication in universities, colleges and schools. It is also important to the voters who
consume the political messages that are normally generated during political campaigns. Another research on the
use of other propaganda techniques, and a comparison done to establish the most preferred by candidates and why,
is recommended.
