The influence in the articles are evident in the fact that it is easy for the ordinary American readers who make the bulk of readers for the daily to buy into her reasoning, considering her reputation and the fact that her claims are seemingly supported by the retrospective actions of the senators and president. President Obama thinks, according to the writer, he can make use of emotion to influence the senators like he does to the public. However, she posits that the senators are “grown men with power” and they cannot be moved by emotive speeches. The president looked set to make some regulations after the massacre in Newton and he said to a loud applause that the Newtown families deserved a vote. It looked like he was going to get exactly what he wanted but he somehow lost his momentum and even told journalist he suspected his bill would not be passed by the congress. Thesis: Was Dowd objective in presenting her article as she did? Was her reasoning true about the president? How did the column succeed in convincing the audience as she claims? Was the president weak in handling the senators or were the senators impossible to handle?
If Obama had wanted to have his way, the writer suggests he should have gone off the highroad and talked to specific senators directly and made them see it his wayinstead of using his vice president. For instance, he could have brought Mark Begich the Alaskan senator and asked him how the bill could be adjusted to make him vote and defend it. Better still,
he could have consulted the view of someone like Heidi Heitkamp from North Dakota and sweet-talk her into voting for the bill based on the fact that she was a mother and she had a term long enough to make such tough calls. Dowd further suggests that he could have strong armed some of the republican senators in whose states he won with the public or used his friendship with the likes of Tom Coburn to get an extra vote in. For instance, why did he give the moving speech about the shameful acts before the vote and not after, when that could have helped him go a long way in votes? Dowd believes that there were many ways Obama could have used to get 60 votes; he simply did not try hard enough. She argues that the president simply does not like to sell his ideas; he assumes that he is on to the right thing and everybody else can see it his way. The article closes by saying it is not just about doing the right thing for the senators, since they have to sell their ideas to their electorate back home; and if they cannot convince them they may not get re-elected. In logical reasoning, Dowd was true in ascribing the fears of the senators to the electorate opinions. Moreover, she uses emotive language in ascertaining that the president had no room for other people’s opinions. She finds him to be just some sort of demagogue who can influence the public’s feelings by manipulating them, but loses out when it comes to convincing those who matter. However, in the first paragraph she begins by saying something positive about him; she talks of the greying man weeping with American families and acknowledges that he has learnt experience how to share the grief of Americans. This statement is placed