[Argumentation in Context 7] 2014
► pp. 63–82
Henry Clay’s reputation was based on his skill in formulating legislative compromises between competing positions, enacting the attribute of prudence. This approach proved unsuccessful in the context of a heated election campaign. Focusing on a series of public letters Clay issued during 1844, this analysis traces his rhetorical difficulties in the campaign and suggests the limitations of a rhetorical stance based on compromise.