Vernacular expressions have become increasingly prominent in political discourse, yet existing research offers conflicting accounts of who can deploy vernacularisms and for what political ends. We synthesise the literature on everyday language in politics and propose a framework of four distinct vernacular rhetorical registers. Qualitative interviews with 19 current and former Australian representatives from different political parties were conducted to determine why politicians use the country’s iconic “fair go” phrase, who they believe can invoke it, and the ideological purposes they pursue through the expression. Moving beyond standard textual analyses of political speech, we adopt an interpretive approach that centres politicians’ own accounts regarding their vernacular rhetorical choices. We find that politicians actively police the vernacular, asserting who may and may not legitimately use it, and that each vernacular register involves its own distinct form of rhetorical gatekeeping. Our study offers original theoretical insights and empirical evidence that advance knowledge on the political uses and limits of everyday expressions.
