1) I visited redstate.org
2)The article about the repeal of Obamacare discussed Akin and Mourdock and asserted that they were misunderstood. This moved beyond fact and into opinion, the author stated, "Republicans must rally to two gentlemen who are committed pro-lifers, but who said things in defense of children that others have decided to beat them up about." He even went so far as to say later in the article, "So suck it the hell up and get in line for Todd Akin (I’m looking at your NRSC) and Richard Mourdock."
3) Although the previously discussed article was almost entirely opinion the article about Hurricane Sandy began with a long list of statistics. It discussed the number of homes damaged and the economic ramifications of this destruction. The article was certainly still biased as it said that Romney "withdrew" from campaigning while Obama was "forced off." Despite this, the combination of fact and opinion made for a much more convincing article than the one discussing Obamacare.
4) Many of the articles have links that back up their facts or statistics. It also listed sites such as Revealing Politics where articles were cross referenced.
5) This site is clearly based on a conservative ideology. This is clear in that the description of the site is "Conservative Blog & Conservative News Source for Right of Center Activists."
6) While this site is a great place for politically-minded people to express their thoughts and read about issues, it is certainly not an unbiased news source. If a member of the electorate who was not already informed about current events visited this site they might be influenced by the way the stories are presented. This biased understanding of a key issue might influence the way this member of the electorate votes and chooses representatives.
Wednesday, October 31, 2012
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
D10
1) I thought it was interesting that in the 2012 Colorado congressional race, the candidates who raised the most in-state contibutions also raised the some of the least out-of-state contributions. However, as I thought about this trend it made sense because Mike Coffman, who raised the most in-state funds, would have to focus all his fundraising efforts within Colorado and would have little to no time to work outside state borders. This explains why he was ranked third to last in out-of-state contributions.
2) Contributions to candidates, overall, were much higher than contributions to political parties. This backs up my notion that people get much more riled up and inspired by specific people than by an ideology. While many people support one party completely, oftentimes regardless of the candidate, they are still moved to contribute on a much larger scale to an individual person than to the party as a whole.
2) Contributions to candidates, overall, were much higher than contributions to political parties. This backs up my notion that people get much more riled up and inspired by specific people than by an ideology. While many people support one party completely, oftentimes regardless of the candidate, they are still moved to contribute on a much larger scale to an individual person than to the party as a whole.
Monday, October 22, 2012
D9
A.
1) This article discusses Americans' beliefs in regard to global warming.
2) The article says that more Americans are starting to believe in global warming and that the number who say that climate change is man-made is also rising. About 67% of Americans currently say that they see significant evidence to support global climate change. This means that politicians can no longer solve their environmental policies issues by simply denying the existence of global warming. Candidates should address the issue of climate change with policies rather than denial. This also applies to our campaign because we should not deny global warming and we should develop policies to deal with global, environmental issues.
3) In general, those 65 and older are much less likely to believe in global warming. Therefore if a candidate is targeting seniors they can take a more conservative view on the environment. Candidates would receive more support from seniors if they were to deny the existence of climate change.
B.
1) "ASK ALL: Q.62 In your view, is global warming a very serious problem, somewhat serious, not too serious, or not a problem?"
2) Since June 2006, the number of people who say that climate change is a serious problem has stayed about the time. It has dropped a little bit from 41 in June 2006 to 39 in October 2012. The number of people who say that it's not problem has risen from a low of 8 in January 2007 to 19 in October 2012.
3) This question seems neutral to me. It could be reworded to be biased as the following: "Due to the environmental impacts of climate change do you agree that global warming is a serious problem?"
C.
1) The poll was taken from October 4-7 2012.
2) The sample size was 1,511.
3) The margin of error is 2.9 percentage points.
4) There is a 95% confidence interval for this survey.
1) This article discusses Americans' beliefs in regard to global warming.
2) The article says that more Americans are starting to believe in global warming and that the number who say that climate change is man-made is also rising. About 67% of Americans currently say that they see significant evidence to support global climate change. This means that politicians can no longer solve their environmental policies issues by simply denying the existence of global warming. Candidates should address the issue of climate change with policies rather than denial. This also applies to our campaign because we should not deny global warming and we should develop policies to deal with global, environmental issues.
3) In general, those 65 and older are much less likely to believe in global warming. Therefore if a candidate is targeting seniors they can take a more conservative view on the environment. Candidates would receive more support from seniors if they were to deny the existence of climate change.
B.
1) "ASK ALL: Q.62 In your view, is global warming a very serious problem, somewhat serious, not too serious, or not a problem?"
2) Since June 2006, the number of people who say that climate change is a serious problem has stayed about the time. It has dropped a little bit from 41 in June 2006 to 39 in October 2012. The number of people who say that it's not problem has risen from a low of 8 in January 2007 to 19 in October 2012.
3) This question seems neutral to me. It could be reworded to be biased as the following: "Due to the environmental impacts of climate change do you agree that global warming is a serious problem?"
C.
1) The poll was taken from October 4-7 2012.
2) The sample size was 1,511.
3) The margin of error is 2.9 percentage points.
4) There is a 95% confidence interval for this survey.
Thursday, October 18, 2012
Mock Election Mission #3
I wrote this speech for Richard to give when speaking to voters during lunches in B commons.
Government is bound by duty. It has a duty to protect, a duty to serve, and a duty to uphold the Constitution. Every citizen in this great country has the right to, in the words of Thomas Jefferson, “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” I stand before you today with a promise. If I am elected, I will uphold this sacred promise. I will uphold my duty to protect my environment, my duty not to overspend and to balance the budget. I will uphold my duty to support health care reform and my duty to prevent discrimination. America is built on equality. This is the backbone of our society. I will help support immigration reform, and equal opportunity for all Americans regardless of race, sex, income, or sexual orientation. Every American has something to offer and if I am elected to the U.S. senate I will help to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to fulfill this potential and propel our country into a better tomorrow.
Government is bound by duty. It has a duty to protect, a duty to serve, and a duty to uphold the Constitution. Every citizen in this great country has the right to, in the words of Thomas Jefferson, “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” I stand before you today with a promise. If I am elected, I will uphold this sacred promise. I will uphold my duty to protect my environment, my duty not to overspend and to balance the budget. I will uphold my duty to support health care reform and my duty to prevent discrimination. America is built on equality. This is the backbone of our society. I will help support immigration reform, and equal opportunity for all Americans regardless of race, sex, income, or sexual orientation. Every American has something to offer and if I am elected to the U.S. senate I will help to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to fulfill this potential and propel our country into a better tomorrow.
Mock Election Mission #2
I wrote this speech for Anna to introduce Richard when visiting AP United States History classes.
I’m here today to introduce someone to you who stands on a platform of change. Richard Potter plans to rebuild our economy, legalize civil unions, and abolish federal parole. Richard Potter plans to balance our budget and provide universal health care. Countless politicians stand up and present ideas, concepts, vague, hazy notions that are out of touch and impractical. Richard, as an independent candidate, is able to work on both sides of the aisle. He can hear opinions from all ends of the spectrum and devise workable strategies to solve issues facing our community. He does not blindly adhere to a party line. Richard makes choices based on his constituents, not party leaders. Richard Potter is many things: an engaged member of the Black Knight community, a model student, and a trustworthy friend. But above all he is your future senator.
I’m here today to introduce someone to you who stands on a platform of change. Richard Potter plans to rebuild our economy, legalize civil unions, and abolish federal parole. Richard Potter plans to balance our budget and provide universal health care. Countless politicians stand up and present ideas, concepts, vague, hazy notions that are out of touch and impractical. Richard, as an independent candidate, is able to work on both sides of the aisle. He can hear opinions from all ends of the spectrum and devise workable strategies to solve issues facing our community. He does not blindly adhere to a party line. Richard makes choices based on his constituents, not party leaders. Richard Potter is many things: an engaged member of the Black Knight community, a model student, and a trustworthy friend. But above all he is your future senator.
Mock Election Mission #1
I wrote this speech for Richard to give when visiting Academic United States History classes.
Democrats and
Republicans are caught in a standoff. Progress will not be possible until we
break out of this mold and begin to focus on the good of the people instead of
the good of the party. That is why
I am running for senate as an independent candidate. This allows me to work
with any politician as long as they have America’s best interests at heart. I
am not confined by a political party. I am free to make independent decisions
instead of walking in lockstep with platforms written by career politicians who
are out of touch with the American people. I will protect small businesses and
middle class families. I will help ensure a bright future for our country by
balancing the national budget. I will work to bring our troops home from Iraq
and Afghanistan. I will help to reestablish the U.S. as a champion of human
rights by supporting Syrian refugees in Turkey. I have a plan. All I need is
your vote.
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
D7
1) Obama focused a lot on incentives for domestic investors. He put an emphasis on creating jobs in our own country and preventing outsourcing. Obama also asked the wealthiest Americans to pay more in order to rebuild America. This policy runs contrary to what he calls Romney's "top down economics." Both candidates discussed energy a great deal. Obama says he's looking at energy sources for the future and also wants to ensure that America is in control of its own energy. Romney's energy plan focuses on oil and coal. He says Obama has been preventing drilling on public land in the U.S., which prevents energy independence. I was disappointed that the candidates focused so much oil and didn't discuss environmental issues as much as I would like. Romney also emphasized his belief government should not be overly controlling in regard to the private sector.
2) Obama said, " Governor Romney doesn't have a five point plan, he has a one point plan." This connects to our own mock election in that it can be a very effective approach to take on key aspects of the opponent's strategy. Obama also said, "These are not just women's issues. These are family issues. These are middle class issues." This can also be connected to the mock election because candidates often try to apply minority issues to the rest of society and try to make these issues important to more of the electorate. Romney said, "Let's look at the president's policies rather than the rhetoric." This is also applicable to the mock election in that it can be very effective to look like you're getting straight to issue without any BS.
3) Overall, I think Obama did much better in this debate than in the last one. He addressed Romney much more directly than he did last time. He also made a visible attempt to appear more energetic and engaged. This is applicable to the mock election in that it is important to know where you've been criticized before and improve yourself in those areas. Obama also often points out Romney's lack of specificity. Romney focused a lot on what he sees as a lack of success in the Obama administration over the last four years. Therefore, both candidates knew where their opponents were weak and brought these issues to light. This can be helpful to Richard in the upcoming debate if he knows weaknesses in his opponents' campaign. Romney also used a thumbs up repeatedly when he was gesticulating during the debate. This created an air of positivity in his actions. Unfortunately, Romney was not very tactful when he avoided the fairly direct question about self-deportation. It will be important for candidates in our debates to be careful when changing the topic of their answer.
4) Obama used a specific example from a 60 minutes interview with Romney when discussing taxation which helped his point seem solid and well supported. Obama was also particularly strong on women's issues. Obama knows that he has strong support from women and so is clear in his support of issues that affect American women today. This is important for our candidate in that they must know their base and support their issues. Romney often brought up specific promises Obama made in the last campaign and has statistics to prove that he hasn't lived up to those promises. Romney also repeatedly brought up Obama's talent as a speaker and used it to compare this strength with what he sees as a lack of talent at creating policies to help the American public.
2) Obama said, " Governor Romney doesn't have a five point plan, he has a one point plan." This connects to our own mock election in that it can be a very effective approach to take on key aspects of the opponent's strategy. Obama also said, "These are not just women's issues. These are family issues. These are middle class issues." This can also be connected to the mock election because candidates often try to apply minority issues to the rest of society and try to make these issues important to more of the electorate. Romney said, "Let's look at the president's policies rather than the rhetoric." This is also applicable to the mock election in that it can be very effective to look like you're getting straight to issue without any BS.
3) Overall, I think Obama did much better in this debate than in the last one. He addressed Romney much more directly than he did last time. He also made a visible attempt to appear more energetic and engaged. This is applicable to the mock election in that it is important to know where you've been criticized before and improve yourself in those areas. Obama also often points out Romney's lack of specificity. Romney focused a lot on what he sees as a lack of success in the Obama administration over the last four years. Therefore, both candidates knew where their opponents were weak and brought these issues to light. This can be helpful to Richard in the upcoming debate if he knows weaknesses in his opponents' campaign. Romney also used a thumbs up repeatedly when he was gesticulating during the debate. This created an air of positivity in his actions. Unfortunately, Romney was not very tactful when he avoided the fairly direct question about self-deportation. It will be important for candidates in our debates to be careful when changing the topic of their answer.
4) Obama used a specific example from a 60 minutes interview with Romney when discussing taxation which helped his point seem solid and well supported. Obama was also particularly strong on women's issues. Obama knows that he has strong support from women and so is clear in his support of issues that affect American women today. This is important for our candidate in that they must know their base and support their issues. Romney often brought up specific promises Obama made in the last campaign and has statistics to prove that he hasn't lived up to those promises. Romney also repeatedly brought up Obama's talent as a speaker and used it to compare this strength with what he sees as a lack of talent at creating policies to help the American public.
Thursday, October 11, 2012
D4
1) Ryan emphasizes strength and defense. He argues that the defense budget should not be cut because America will risk looking weak to the rest of the world, and that our enemies will take advantage of this. Ryan also focuses on the idea that the U.S. is not better off today then it was four years ago. He points out unemployment and economic decline. Ryan also emphasized the health care policy that does not change medicare for people in the system now, his policies will only affect future seniors. Biden, similarly to Obama, is focusing on the tax policies of the Republican candidates. He argues that Ryan will create tax cuts for the wealthy while leaving middle class and poor Americans to fend for themselves. The Democratic strategy seems to be to paint the Republicans as dismissive of poor Americans. Biden points to Ryan's opposition of ObamaCare and his changes to medicare to prove this point.
2) Joe Biden said, "Stop talking about how you care about people. Show me a policy." This points out many voters feeling that although politicians can advocate change, they don't always have a specific plan that they can point to in order to create this change.
Paul Ryan asked Biden,"Where are the 5 million green jobs we were told would be created?" Ryan often argues that the Obama did not live up the promises he made in the last campaign. This question points this issue out.
3) Both vice-presidential candidates were a little sassier and more aggressive than the presidential candidates in the first debate. Joe Biden interrupted Paul Ryan several times, which I think many viewers will find obnoxious and unappealing. Biden also tries to appeal to viewers common sense, he often asked voters to follow their instinct. Ryan seems to rely on the idea that the Obama campaign is attacking Mitt Romney because they don't have a positive record to run on themselves. Both candidates are good speakers who are breaking down complex issues into simple terms. Overall, Ryan might come off as more appealing to voters though because of Biden's interruptions and the fact that he often laughs while Ryan is speaking. Biden also refers to Ryan as "my friend" throughout the debate to seem more amenable.
4) The moderator is running a much tighter show than Lehrer did in the presidential debate. She cut the speakers off fairly strictly at the time limits and asked more specific questions than Lehrer. She also asked a lot more follow up questions. Jim Lehrer was criticized for his hands off approach so perhaps Martha Raddatz is trying to avoid this. I found one of the last questions, about the candidates' religion and abortion, to be particularly interesting. As a Catholic and a Democrat this question is something that I've struggled with myself. I thought both candidates had good points. Ryan argued that life begins at conception and so abortion should be illegal while Biden argued that while he personally agrees with the Church's pro-life stance he does not believe in imposing this on women across the country.
2) Joe Biden said, "Stop talking about how you care about people. Show me a policy." This points out many voters feeling that although politicians can advocate change, they don't always have a specific plan that they can point to in order to create this change.
Paul Ryan asked Biden,"Where are the 5 million green jobs we were told would be created?" Ryan often argues that the Obama did not live up the promises he made in the last campaign. This question points this issue out.
3) Both vice-presidential candidates were a little sassier and more aggressive than the presidential candidates in the first debate. Joe Biden interrupted Paul Ryan several times, which I think many viewers will find obnoxious and unappealing. Biden also tries to appeal to viewers common sense, he often asked voters to follow their instinct. Ryan seems to rely on the idea that the Obama campaign is attacking Mitt Romney because they don't have a positive record to run on themselves. Both candidates are good speakers who are breaking down complex issues into simple terms. Overall, Ryan might come off as more appealing to voters though because of Biden's interruptions and the fact that he often laughs while Ryan is speaking. Biden also refers to Ryan as "my friend" throughout the debate to seem more amenable.
4) The moderator is running a much tighter show than Lehrer did in the presidential debate. She cut the speakers off fairly strictly at the time limits and asked more specific questions than Lehrer. She also asked a lot more follow up questions. Jim Lehrer was criticized for his hands off approach so perhaps Martha Raddatz is trying to avoid this. I found one of the last questions, about the candidates' religion and abortion, to be particularly interesting. As a Catholic and a Democrat this question is something that I've struggled with myself. I thought both candidates had good points. Ryan argued that life begins at conception and so abortion should be illegal while Biden argued that while he personally agrees with the Church's pro-life stance he does not believe in imposing this on women across the country.
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
D3
A. 1956 - Cartoon Man
1) Made by Eisenhower and the Republicans
2) The ad was preying on the indecision voters feel as a result of the bombardment of issues that occurs close to elections. The ad focused on stripping away all of these issues and focusing on the man himself, making Eisenhower more appealing to undecided voters.
1984 - Arms Race
1) Made by Mondale and the Democrats
2) This ad relies on fear. The ad details the possible ramifications of taking the arms race into space, and these effects appear deadly and irreversible. The as focuses on Reagan and anti-disarmament and warns America that Mondale is the only man who can stop Reagan from destroying peace and an American quality of life.
2000 - Dangerous World
1) Made by Bush Jr. and the Republicans
2) This ad also relies on fear, it describes a world that is dangerous to America and must re responded to with strength and power. The Republicans are hoping to make Americans feel like they must rely on the government, and Bush, for protection. Bush promises a strong military and an iron defense to help keep America safe.
B. 1) The Eisenhower ad from 1956 focused on a very mainstream America, the idea of America and of Americans was not so much that of a melting pot and diversity as it is now but more one of the white middle class, trying to raise a family and earn a living. One of Bush's ads, called Muchas Gracias, was focused on Hispanic voters and was entirely in Spanish. Presidential candidates seem to focus on minority voters and different demographics in more recent ads whereas older ads show a more stereotypical America. In addition, the older ads are much longer. Ads from the 2000's are 30 seconds long in comparison to the Eisenhower ad from the 1950's that was over 4 minutes long. This suggests a change in American society, one where Americans have shorter attention spans and more options. In the 50's there were not hundreds of channels to flip through during ads whereas nowadays, during commercials, there are countless other options for viewing.
2) The first ad was most effective for me. The later two focused on fear and negativity while the first was positive and clear. Also, the beginning few seconds that showed the cartoon man being slammed with issues and vocabulary, were very appropriate and similar to how I often feel leading up to elections. Living in Virginia, my house is called by both parties and polling agencies every night and ads for candidates are impossible to ignore. It seems that what was appealing to voters in 1956 is still appealing today.
1) Made by Eisenhower and the Republicans
2) The ad was preying on the indecision voters feel as a result of the bombardment of issues that occurs close to elections. The ad focused on stripping away all of these issues and focusing on the man himself, making Eisenhower more appealing to undecided voters.
1984 - Arms Race
1) Made by Mondale and the Democrats
2) This ad relies on fear. The ad details the possible ramifications of taking the arms race into space, and these effects appear deadly and irreversible. The as focuses on Reagan and anti-disarmament and warns America that Mondale is the only man who can stop Reagan from destroying peace and an American quality of life.
2000 - Dangerous World
1) Made by Bush Jr. and the Republicans
2) This ad also relies on fear, it describes a world that is dangerous to America and must re responded to with strength and power. The Republicans are hoping to make Americans feel like they must rely on the government, and Bush, for protection. Bush promises a strong military and an iron defense to help keep America safe.
B. 1) The Eisenhower ad from 1956 focused on a very mainstream America, the idea of America and of Americans was not so much that of a melting pot and diversity as it is now but more one of the white middle class, trying to raise a family and earn a living. One of Bush's ads, called Muchas Gracias, was focused on Hispanic voters and was entirely in Spanish. Presidential candidates seem to focus on minority voters and different demographics in more recent ads whereas older ads show a more stereotypical America. In addition, the older ads are much longer. Ads from the 2000's are 30 seconds long in comparison to the Eisenhower ad from the 1950's that was over 4 minutes long. This suggests a change in American society, one where Americans have shorter attention spans and more options. In the 50's there were not hundreds of channels to flip through during ads whereas nowadays, during commercials, there are countless other options for viewing.
2) The first ad was most effective for me. The later two focused on fear and negativity while the first was positive and clear. Also, the beginning few seconds that showed the cartoon man being slammed with issues and vocabulary, were very appropriate and similar to how I often feel leading up to elections. Living in Virginia, my house is called by both parties and polling agencies every night and ads for candidates are impossible to ignore. It seems that what was appealing to voters in 1956 is still appealing today.
Thursday, October 4, 2012
C9
1) Romney emphasized his promise to lower taxes. He believes in a small federal government and discussed the various ways he would take power from the national government and give it to state legislatures. He plans to decrease government revenue through high taxes and instead try to increase employment and make up the difference in income by receiving taxes from more people. Romney also hopes to repeal ObamaCare and give states more power in distributing well-fare to the poor. Obama emphasized the benefits of ObamaCare to justify the money he has spent on implementing it. Obama defended his efforts to increase healthcare coverage for all Americans from allowing children to stay on their parents' insurance longer to helping to lower premiums. One topic that both candidates discussed a lot was the middle class. Both Obama and Romney seem to have focused in on appealing to middle class voters.
2) Obama discussed Romney's lack of specificity, this is a key point in Obama's campaign against Romney. He said, “And at some point I think the American people have to ask themselves: Is the reason that Governor Romney is keeping all these plans to replace secret, because they are too good?. Is it because that somehow middle class families will benefit too much from them?”
Romney also zinged Obama. One of his main strategies of the debate was to deny the facts that Obama presented, especially regarding Romney's tax plan. Romney said, “Mr. President, you’re entitled to your own house and your own airplane, but not your own facts.”
3) Romney seemed much more energetic than Obama. Romney had clearly had a lot of preparation for the debate and he appeared fresh and excited. Obama was fairly laid back. He left a lot of opportunities go by to aggressively go after Romney. Obama looked at his notes a lot and seemed less engaged. I think Obama will try to turn up his energy for the next debate since Romney appeared much more energized in the first debate.
4) The environment was briefly touched on several times when Romney accused Obama of spending too much on green energy development and green businesses. Although the focus was mainly on economics and health care I was surprised that there was so little discussion of environmental regulation and protection. I hope to see more in the future.
2) Obama discussed Romney's lack of specificity, this is a key point in Obama's campaign against Romney. He said, “And at some point I think the American people have to ask themselves: Is the reason that Governor Romney is keeping all these plans to replace secret, because they are too good?. Is it because that somehow middle class families will benefit too much from them?”
Romney also zinged Obama. One of his main strategies of the debate was to deny the facts that Obama presented, especially regarding Romney's tax plan. Romney said, “Mr. President, you’re entitled to your own house and your own airplane, but not your own facts.”
3) Romney seemed much more energetic than Obama. Romney had clearly had a lot of preparation for the debate and he appeared fresh and excited. Obama was fairly laid back. He left a lot of opportunities go by to aggressively go after Romney. Obama looked at his notes a lot and seemed less engaged. I think Obama will try to turn up his energy for the next debate since Romney appeared much more energized in the first debate.
4) The environment was briefly touched on several times when Romney accused Obama of spending too much on green energy development and green businesses. Although the focus was mainly on economics and health care I was surprised that there was so little discussion of environmental regulation and protection. I hope to see more in the future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)