Samma fråga med med olika svar? : En studie som jämför Sverigedemokraternas budskap om partiets äldrepolitik i valmanifest, motion och i debattartiklar.

Through the phenomenon of digitization, political parties are now able to communicate their messages in a variety of ways. With this in mind, it is interesting to see how different parties tweak and refine their messages to different target groups. Earlier research suggests that arguments that affect people's feelings are those that make us act. It also shows that value-added words are usually used in connection with such arguments, which coincided with the results of this study. The purpose of this study was to combine rhetorical analysis and critical discourse analysis to see how the Sweden Democrats communicate their elderly policy in three main forums: election manifesto, motions, and the media. The framing of the main question therefore was "How do the Sweden Democrats communicate their elderly policy in their election manifesto, motions and in the media?". The material used in the analysis included three debate articles that were selected through the search words SD, Debate and 2018. Furthermore, the Sweden Democrats’ latest motion and the party's election manifesto on elderly policy were used. The analysis was conducted by reviewing the texts individually and by finding different tools that fell within the framework of rhetorical analysis and critical discourse analysis. This was followed by a summary of the tools that existed and of how the texts differed. The result of the analysis showed that the messages used in the three forums were similar, but that they were designed differently to suit the intended target group. For example, in the debate articles, the Sweden Democrats used arguments that evoked emotions, while in the election manifesto and above all the motion, they used arguments that were supported by data-based facts