A Sociolinguistic Analysis of the Theme of Immigration in the American Presidential Debates between Trump and Harris in 2024

Abstract

The present study offers a sociolinguistic discussion of the immigration discourse featured in the 2024 presidential debates between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris.

The problem of the theme of immigration in the presidential debates between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris lies in how deeply polarized, politically charged, and linguistically manipulated the topic has become. 

 By using Basil Bernstein’s theory of language codes and William Labov’s narrative analysis,the study explores how each of the candidates utilize different linguistic strategies to constitute immigration.But Trump’s rhetoric is a constrained code,moreover, Labov’s framework exposes divergences in narrative form, with Trump depending on crisis-led narratives and Harris emphasizing explanatory causes and a policy sensibility.

Indeed, the findeings emphasize the way in which the choice of words can shape political narratives, reinforce ideological divisions, and have an impact on voters' perceptions. It has been concluded that the discourse of Trump uses alarmist and securitized language, depicting immigration as a national crisis that endangers American sovereignty. He uses negative word choices and strong emotive metaphors to amplify fear and advocate for extreme border protection policies. Unlike Harris, Trump sees border control policies in more humanized and procedural tones highlighting empathy, legal change, and the identity of America as a land of immigrants. She takes a characteristically rights-based stance focused on vulnerable populations, inclusion and pathways to citizenship and, most importantly, protection. This comparison sheds light on how each candidate attempts to navigate and elaborate upon sociopolitical identities through projection of policy stances using immigration policies as a primary tool for discourse.