Politics in Metaphor: How Presidential Candidates Frame Their Visions in Debates

Abstract

Political language serves as a powerful instrument to shape perceptions, evoke emotions, and guide decision-making, particularly in critical settings such as presidential debates. This study explores the role of metaphors in the presidential candidate debates in the Republic of Indonesia. Using a descriptive qualitative research with a content analysis approach, the research draws on Lakoff and Johnson's (1980) theory of Cognitive Metaphor to analyse the use of metaphorical expressions by the candidates in the debates organized by the General Election Commission (KPU). The study also investigates the impact of these metaphors on audience opinions during the election process. Two official debate sessions conducted by the KPU served as the primary focus of this research. The findings reveal the presence of various types of metaphors, including nine dead metaphors, six active metaphors, five implicit metaphors, and six submerged metaphors. Among the candidates, Anies Baswedan (candidate number one) demonstrated a slight advantage in employing metaphors and persuasive strategies, using 11 metaphorical expressions. This was followed by Prabowo Subianto (candidate number two) with eight expressions and Ganjar Pranowo (candidate number three) with seven expressions. The study highlights the significant role metaphors play in shaping public opinion and influencing voters' decisions. By creating connections between objects and subjects, metaphors provide audiences with new perspectives and stir emotional responses. In conclusion, the strategic use of metaphors in political debates can profoundly impact voter emotions and, ultimately, their choice of the best presidential candidates.