However, after learning about diction in class, I do find her argument somewhat reasonable. She focuses on Trump’s diction, specifically his use of words with negative connotations to describe Ms. Champ. “President Trump’s decision to refer to Crystal Champ only as “a homeless, addicted pregnant woman,” to identify her with a series of unpleasant descriptors, to not include her as a main character in Baby Hope’s story, is the extension of [anti-abortion] language” (par. 21). Her use of examples of anti-abortion language works well to inform the reader what it looks like and how Trump is guilty of using it, but at times it felt like she was nitpicking over specifics. Overall, I think her comparison of Trump’s description of the story and the motives of pro-life believers is a
However, after learning about diction in class, I do find her argument somewhat reasonable. She focuses on Trump’s diction, specifically his use of words with negative connotations to describe Ms. Champ. “President Trump’s decision to refer to Crystal Champ only as “a homeless, addicted pregnant woman,” to identify her with a series of unpleasant descriptors, to not include her as a main character in Baby Hope’s story, is the extension of [anti-abortion] language” (par. 21). Her use of examples of anti-abortion language works well to inform the reader what it looks like and how Trump is guilty of using it, but at times it felt like she was nitpicking over specifics. Overall, I think her comparison of Trump’s description of the story and the motives of pro-life believers is a