Gaming in Political Discourses: A Cognitive Analysis of the Framing and Reframing Strategies in the American Presidential Election Debates

Taking as its data the scripts of the debates on economic issues in the first debate of the 2012 US presidential election and Framing Theory as its framework, this paper analyzes the strategies of political gaming between Obama and Romney and summarizes the main frames and reframes they have used from the perspective of public acceptance.The present study verifies the claim by Lakoff (2004/2008) that the American Republican Party does better in framing its political views than the Democratic Party.It is further discovered that in the process of framing American economic reality for conceptual manipulation, Romney uses such mind chunks as metaphors, images and narratives in his frames more successfully and manipulates the public's emotions more efficiently; Romney states his policies on the basis of Republicans' moral values and reframes Obama's economic frames morally, while Obama's frames are merely confined to the specific policies themselves; Obama frequently copies Romney's language and reinforces his frames by repetition, which somehow helps Romney win the support of more "swing voters".