The political tribune traditionally used high standards of official and business style. But the change in the cultural level of communication, its decline and vulgarization also affected this area. The political language is saturated with roughly colloquial expressions. This causes indignation of the part of society that still tends to strict stylistic differentiation. Speech must meet the requirements of clarity, logic, and language correctness. Intelligibility implies a focus on the average level of the addressee, their cultural preferences, mental characteristics and behavioral stereotypes. Most often, literary language of the journalistic variety is used for communication, interspersed with elements of official business, colloquial and scientific style. Deviations from the correct literary speech are often a means of recognizing a political figure. Most often, these are parasitic words or stable turns of speech: "definitely", "you understand"," shta "instead of"what". All these words acquire a political bias due to their attribution to a specific person, which cannot be said about common language words - parasites: "in nature", "type", "well". Clearly correct and intelligent speech is rare in political communication. Soviet propaganda presented it as a sign of the enemy, so it is perceived negatively by some of the population, causing irritation or envy: from a Russian politician, they say, wisdom is required, not erudition, activity, not eloquence. Currently, the use of colloquial and slang vocabulary is limited to situations of informal or emotional communication. Such a word stands out as an element of a different style, its foreignness is well understood, and it becomes a source of language play. The average literary language seems too expressionless, neutral, and politics tends to express itself. Therefore, there is an active penetration of words that usually go beyond the literary language. As you can see, these tendencies are most pronounced in political ... Read more