The Rhetorical Construction of Democracy in Post–Cold War America: Presidential Framing in State of the Union Addresses

<p style="margin: 0in; text-indent: .5in; line-height: 200%;">This study examines how presidential rhetoric in State of the Union (SOTU) addresses from 1993 to 2024 constructs and frames democracy, and how these constructions change across political and historical contexts. Drawing on 27 SOTU addresses across the Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations, the analysis uses qualitative coding to identify instances in which presidents describe democracy and categorize those references based on their thematic focus and valence (positive, negative, or neutral). This approach allows for systematic comparison while situating each document within the major events of its period. <p style="margin: 0in; text-indent: .5in; line-height: 200%;">The findings show that presidential rhetoric adapts to changing conditions rather than following a linear trajectory. Crises correspond with increased emphasis on threat, defense, and democratic vulnerability, while relative stability is associated with greater emphasis on institutional effectiveness, governance, and opportunity. Concurrently, presidents pair recognition of strain with language emphasizing institutional capacity and national resilience. Over time, however, democratic rhetoric becomes more contested, with later administrations more frequently incorporating internal division, institutional pressure, and competing interpretations of legitimacy. <p style="margin: 0in; text-indent: .5in; line-height: 200%;">These findings demonstrate that presidential rhetoric does more than respond to political conditions; it helps define democracy itself. By shaping how institutions, participation, and legitimacy are described, rhetoric influences how democratic stability and vulnerability are understood in practice.