Which president was a better speaker?

Ronald Reagan [Billy Hathorn, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons]

Being somewhat of a fan of public speaking - though I'm not very good at it myself - I thought I would look at the inaugration speeches of Ronald Reagan (1981) and Donald Trump (2025). In my opinion, President Reagan was the last US President who as not only a statesman but also of a gentlemanly bearing.

I however, do not care much about politics, even less about US politics - especially in the current day. So to get a more objective comparison between the two speeches, I employed Google Gemini (AI).

I started by asking Gemini to analyse and compare the vocabulary and writing style of both speeches. This was its response:

Based on the provided sources, we can analyse and compare the vocabulary and writing style of the two inaugural addresses.

Vocabulary and Writing Style in Ronald Reagan's 1981 Address

Ronald Reagan's 1981 Inaugural Address employs a relatively formal and measured vocabulary while remaining accessible to a broad audience. He uses terms such as "economic affliction of great proportions", "sustained inflations", "penalizes thrift", and describes idle industries casting workers into "unemployment, human misery, and personal indignity". The tax system is characterised as denying workers a "fair return for their labor" and penalising "successful achievement". He speaks of piling "deficit upon deficit, mortgaging our future" and the potential for "tremendous social, cultural, political, and economic upheavals". He refers to "unnecessary and excessive growth of government" and "roadblocks that have slowed our economy and reduced productivity". He evokes traditional national identity by referring to citizens as "my fellow citizens" and "''We the people,'' this breed called Americans".

The writing style is characterised by a structured, logical flow and the use of classic rhetorical devices. Reagan uses parallelism effectively, for example, stating the goal is for government "to work with us, not over us; to stand by our side, not ride on our back", and to "provide opportunity, not smother it; foster productivity, not stifle it". He employs metaphors like the nation "living beyond its means" and the need to "reawaken this industrial giant". A central rhetorical point is the contrast between government as the problem and the people as the solution. The tone is serious and acknowledges significant challenges, but it is underpinned by optimism about the nation's capacity and a call for collective action and renewed spirit. He references historical figures and events to ground his message in American tradition and resilience.

Vocabulary and Writing Style in the 2025 Address Excerpts

The excerpts from the 2025 Inaugural Address use a more direct, colloquial, and often highly charged or hyperbolic vocabulary. Key terms include "golden age", "envy of every nation", "vicious, violent, and unfair weaponization", "crisis of trust", "radical and corrupt establishment", "pillars of our society lay broken and seemingly in complete disrepair", "continuing catalogue of catastrophic events abroad", "dangerous criminals", "unlimited funding", "horrible betrayal and... many betrayals", "America’s decline is over", "Liberation Day", "disastrous invasion of our country", "record inflation", "liquid gold", "revolution of common sense", "government censorship", "radical political theories and social experiments", and "manifest destiny into the stars". The language often casts issues in stark terms of good versus bad, referring to "magnificent, law-abiding American citizens" being failed while "sanctuary and protection" is provided to "dangerous criminals".

The writing style is characterised by a strong emphasis on immediate action and dramatic change, often using shorter, impactful sentences alongside longer lists of grievances or promised actions. It relies heavily on repetition (e.g., "Thank you", extensive use of "will" to promise future actions [e.g., 28, 31, 32]), and hyperbole or strong assertions ("strongest military the world has ever seen", "greatest, most powerful, most respected nation on earth", "impossible is what we do best", "win like never before"). The style is highly confrontational, directly identifying antagonists like a "radical and corrupt establishment", and speaking of "defeating America’s enemies". It incorporates personal narrative and assertions, referencing an assassination attempt and claiming a personal mandate from God and the voters. The tone is urgent, assertive, and deeply critical of the recent past, positioning the present moment as an immediate reversal of decline. It aims for a conversational feel at times, including parenthetical remarks like "(Laughter)" and "(Applause)" frequently noted.

Comparison

Comparing the two speeches reveals distinct differences in their linguistic approach:

1.

Formality of Vocabulary: Reagan's address uses more traditional, formal political language. The 2025 address uses more informal, often stronger, and more politically charged terms, favouring words like "corrupt," "betrayal," "invasion," and "weaponization".

2.

Rhetorical Emphasis: While both use rhetorical devices, Reagan leans on parallelism, metaphor, and historical allusion to build a sense of shared history and purpose. The 2025 address relies more heavily on hyperbole, direct accusation, and lists of specific actions or grievances to convey urgency and assertiveness. Repetition is prominent in both but serves slightly different purposes; Reagan repeats key ideas or phrases for emphasis, while the 2025 address frequently repeats promises or labels [e.g., "will" + action, names of groups/issues].

3.

Tone: Reagan's tone is serious, grounded in acknowledging difficult economic realities, but ultimately hopeful and calls for collective, deliberate effort. The 2025 address adopts a more urgent, confrontational, and personal tone, portraying the situation as a catastrophic failure and betrayal requiring immediate, dramatic action led by the speaker.

4.

Framing of Problems and Solutions: Reagan frames the primary problem as economic distress caused by excessive government growth and spending, with the solution lying in reducing government intervention and unleashing the people's potential. The 2025 address frames the problem as a broader collapse of trust and government competence across multiple domains (economy, security, services, culture) caused by a "radical and corrupt establishment," with the solution being the immediate, forceful dismantling of this establishment and reversal of its policies by a new administration.

In summary, Reagan's speech style is more traditionally formal and focuses on collective responsibility and policy adjustments for economic recovery, while the 2025 address uses a more aggressive, populist, and personal style, emphasising immediate, forceful action to correct perceived betrayals and failures orchestrated by a specific "establishment."

I then asked a more pointed question: Considering the two speeches, which president shows a higher level of education and stateliness?

Based on the vocabulary, writing style, and tone evident in the provided excerpts from the two inaugural addresses, we can draw inferences about which speech exhibits characteristics traditionally associated with a higher level of formal education and stateliness. This assessment is based solely on the texts provided and does not reflect the actual educational backgrounds or personal attributes of the individuals giving the speeches outside of these contexts.

Analysing the two speeches based on vocabulary, style, and tone (as discussed in our previous conversation):

Ronald Reagan's 1981 Address

•

Vocabulary and Style: Reagan's address employs a relatively formal and measured vocabulary, using terms like "economic affliction of great proportions," "sustained inflations," "penalises thrift," "human misery, and personal indignity," and referring to "unnecessary and excessive growth of government". The writing style is structured and logical, utilising classic rhetorical devices such as parallelism ("work with us, not over us; to stand by our side, not ride on our back") and metaphors like the nation "living beyond its means". He incorporates historical references to figures like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Winston Churchill, and Dr. Joseph Warren, as well as specific battles and historical events. This use of elevated language, structured argumentation, and historical context is often associated with formal education.

•

Tone and Stateliness: The tone is serious and acknowledges significant challenges, but is also underpinned by optimism and a call for collective action. The way he addresses the audience, starting with a formal list of dignitaries, and the consistent, measured delivery contribute to a sense of stateliness and dignity befitting a head of state assuming office. The focus is largely on policy challenges and national character rather than personal grievances.

The 2025 Inaugural Address Excerpts

•

Vocabulary and Style: The 2025 address excerpts use a more direct, colloquial, and often highly charged or hyperbolic vocabulary. Terms like "radical and corrupt establishment," "pillars of our society lay broken and seemingly in complete disrepair," "horrible betrayal," and "disastrous invasion" are prominent. The style relies heavily on repetition (e.g., frequent use of "Thank you" and "will") and strong assertions or hyperbole ("strongest military the world has ever seen," "impossible is what we do best," "win like never before"). It includes personal narrative (referencing an assassination attempt) and uses interjections like "(Applause)" and "(Laughter)" within the text. While effective in communication, this style is less traditionally formal or academic.

•

Tone and Stateliness: The tone is urgent, assertive, confrontational, and highly personal. It focuses on immediate action and dramatic reversal of past "betrayals". While starting with a formal address to dignitaries, the frequent use of interjections and the inclusion of personal anecdotes and asides creates a less traditionally ceremonial feel compared to Reagan's speech. The strong emphasis on personal agency ("I will") and a perceived personal mandate ("saved by God") also contribute to a tone distinct from the more collective and institutionally grounded approach in the 1981 address.

Conclusion

Based solely on the linguistic evidence in the provided excerpts:

The Ronald Reagan 1981 Inaugural Address exhibits characteristics more strongly associated with a higher level of traditional formal education and stateliness. This is demonstrated through its more complex and formal vocabulary, structured argumentation, extensive use of classic rhetorical devices and historical allusions, and a measured, dignified tone.

The 2025 address excerpts, while forceful and direct, employ a simpler, more colloquial, and often hyperbolic vocabulary, a style more reliant on repetition and strong assertion, and a tone that is more urgent, confrontational, and personal. These features are less characteristic of traditional academic discourse or ceremonial stateliness when compared directly to the style of the 1981 address.

It is important to reiterate that this analysis is confined strictly to the textual evidence of these specific speech excerpts and does not make claims about the individuals themselves outside of these documents.