Unit: Public Culture
Link: http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/10/28/a-humbler-donald-trump-pleads-with-iowans-im-not-leaving/?ref=topics&_r=0
Synopsis: In this article, Trip Gabriel documents one infamous competitor in the search for the next Republican presidential candidate. Beloved by the media for his popularity with the general public, Trump disseminates his political and social ideologies by being blunt and brash in order to create simplicity. According to recent polling, Trump has lost his lead in the state of Iowa. After leading the poll for Republican candidacy in the state for the last few months, being reduced to second place made Iowa the next necessary state to visit on his campaign trail. Encompassing a majority of evangelical voters, mainly women, the popular candidate was shifting to Ben Carson over Trump. He decided to visit again though his political campaign heads advised him to "cut his losses". He promised to work really hard, and that he "loved them all", although needling his haters and encouraging his supporters at the same time. Arguing with the recent data has turned to bargaining as Trump asked Iowans to stick with their decisions. Not singling out Carson's Seventh-day Adventist faith proved to be a smart decision in a state like Iowa where personal religion is not to be criticized. He ended his campaign outreaches and talks in Iowa with the following: "Now if I lose Iowa, I will never speak to you people again".
Analysis: Considering the different ways to use data represented through polling, in this instance Trump feels like losing first place deserves a fight to regain that number-one place in the Republican rankings. In terms of political ideology, the stereotypical Iowan citizen agrees with many of the conservative views of Trump. According to Gabriel, Trump has the resource of a grassroots-program advocate in Iowa for encouraging Republican political socialization. This strategist claims that Trump might still be able to win in Iowa, since he has been leading in all the past polls. Yet the past history shows that no candidate who has lost a lead in the polls in both the last two cycles has won the final candidacy. But does Trump really have the resources and time to personalize his political message to urge a percentage of Iowan voters back to his side? It is advised to spend valuable campaign time winning voters on the mid-line between important issues who are able to be swayed. Perhaps Trump is taking this drop in the polling too personally, and this pride and shame of humility might prove to lose him other votes in states where he could have influenced voters in order to win by a majority.
Friday, October 30, 2015
Wednesday, October 21, 2015
"The Strange Political Culture of Today's GOP"
Unit: Political Culture
Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-schmookler/the-strange-political-cul_b_8146870.html
Synopsis: In this article, Andy Schmookler juxtaposes long-standing American values and political ideology. With the example of the then current Speaker of the House's declaration on the Republican party's continued fight against the Iran deal, he claims that such a response defies two rules. First, that such behavior constitutes that of a sore loser, or someone with sour grapes, who does not deign to offer congratulations or at least respect to the winning party. The example of the hawks' battle over land lost in the Panama Canal Treaty during President Jimmy Carter's term in office was given, as in this modern time they lost, but in the past when the same thing happened they accepted the deal and moved on with their political concerns. Schmookler gave another example of the Republican party's bad attitude on the political field with health care, with President Obama and the Democrats coming out as the clear leaders with the creation of Obamacare. The author argues that the Republicans have still not moved on after five years after refusing to expand Medicaid at the state level and voting to repeal the act over fifty times in the House. The second rule that the Republicans are defying is the need for purposeful action; Boehner's comment emphasizes a political culture that does not care if their action will achieve positive results or not, as seen in the battle against the Iran deal and health care.
Analysis: This article creates imagery between the Democrats and Republicans reminiscent of squabbling children upset over the result of a play activity. It is difficult to think of individuals who hold power over the direction of the nation resort to such childish coping abilities for losing. The Republican party does not need any other obstacles standing in their way what with the upcoming presidential elections for 2016 and their failure in the past presidential elections compared to the Democrat's success. The author specifically named Ted Cruz as such a Republican who emphasizes the wasteful political action and opinions in exchange for a medic presence. The worry is what the voters will think; do the people want a party that is again threatening to shut down government over federal funding for Planned Parenthood, a major conflict for congressional Republicans? Although more progressive topics like abortion stands with pro-choice liberals, does the role of religion in the more conservative and Republican pro-life stance on the issue need to be continually publicized in the political playing field instead of compromising or even admitting to loss? Perhaps the Republican party feel like they need to defend their ideals for their voters in the losing political culture to think that their opinions are being supported and worked on, but there comes a point when an issue has been resolved and put to rest and further fighting is futile and purposeless.
Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-schmookler/the-strange-political-cul_b_8146870.html
Synopsis: In this article, Andy Schmookler juxtaposes long-standing American values and political ideology. With the example of the then current Speaker of the House's declaration on the Republican party's continued fight against the Iran deal, he claims that such a response defies two rules. First, that such behavior constitutes that of a sore loser, or someone with sour grapes, who does not deign to offer congratulations or at least respect to the winning party. The example of the hawks' battle over land lost in the Panama Canal Treaty during President Jimmy Carter's term in office was given, as in this modern time they lost, but in the past when the same thing happened they accepted the deal and moved on with their political concerns. Schmookler gave another example of the Republican party's bad attitude on the political field with health care, with President Obama and the Democrats coming out as the clear leaders with the creation of Obamacare. The author argues that the Republicans have still not moved on after five years after refusing to expand Medicaid at the state level and voting to repeal the act over fifty times in the House. The second rule that the Republicans are defying is the need for purposeful action; Boehner's comment emphasizes a political culture that does not care if their action will achieve positive results or not, as seen in the battle against the Iran deal and health care.
Analysis: This article creates imagery between the Democrats and Republicans reminiscent of squabbling children upset over the result of a play activity. It is difficult to think of individuals who hold power over the direction of the nation resort to such childish coping abilities for losing. The Republican party does not need any other obstacles standing in their way what with the upcoming presidential elections for 2016 and their failure in the past presidential elections compared to the Democrat's success. The author specifically named Ted Cruz as such a Republican who emphasizes the wasteful political action and opinions in exchange for a medic presence. The worry is what the voters will think; do the people want a party that is again threatening to shut down government over federal funding for Planned Parenthood, a major conflict for congressional Republicans? Although more progressive topics like abortion stands with pro-choice liberals, does the role of religion in the more conservative and Republican pro-life stance on the issue need to be continually publicized in the political playing field instead of compromising or even admitting to loss? Perhaps the Republican party feel like they need to defend their ideals for their voters in the losing political culture to think that their opinions are being supported and worked on, but there comes a point when an issue has been resolved and put to rest and further fighting is futile and purposeless.
Thursday, October 15, 2015
"Restoring Federalism in Education"
Unit: Federalism
Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/thomas-j-gentzel/restoring-federalism-in-e_b_8177738.html
Synopsis: In this article, Thomas J. Gentzel remarks upon relationship between federalism and education in the United States of America. The author argues that the central ideology has been twisted, or very nearly lost, after the growing power of the central government in the nation after responses to changing times and the modern age like terrorism. Since Congress makes up only a small part of the government, the power of the state and local governments are being seen as negligible through the eyes of many students in both high school and middle school. Gentzel proposes that the current connotation of federalism in the classroom is associated with the word "federal", conjuring images of the executive branch and figureheads in Congress. A possible venue that might cause this skewed belief to change and realize the role of state and local governments might exist in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) bills passed by the House of Representatives and Senate. These acts, though not flawless, emphasize the role of local levels of government in giving public school education. Some groups like the National School Boards Association and their state school board association counterparts see this movement of power as more beneficial opposed to the current situation without acts like ESEA.
Analysis: The best definition of federalism is where every level of government works together for the benefit of the citizenry. In the exposition of this article, the ESEA represents a significant win in the legal world for proponents behind a more federalist power distribution like cooperative federalism in the creation and implementation of education systems in the United States. In fact, this article was originally published in the American School Board Journal earlier in this week of October, 2015, an organization dedicated to informing the public about school government and changes in policy that affect the growing generation of citizens. Although the exact intergovernmental relations proposed through this bill are still being figured out in the legal workplace, it seems natural for the state and local government to have more power in public education. This act is not evidence of devolution; rather, national legislation fails to incorporate the unique needs of towns, counties, or states that might be subject to special circumstances. Yet according to the Supremacy Clause, education legislation must be followed by all states in the nation. For example, the recent Common Core State Standards prove difficulty for different schools in which the overall population is not aiming for standardized "success in college" but rather working towards a trade or another kind of vocational technical educational path. Hopefully the ESEA passes with a precedent for future education legislation in which greater personalization state-by-state is possible with local government feedback and regulation in education delivery.
Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/thomas-j-gentzel/restoring-federalism-in-e_b_8177738.html
Synopsis: In this article, Thomas J. Gentzel remarks upon relationship between federalism and education in the United States of America. The author argues that the central ideology has been twisted, or very nearly lost, after the growing power of the central government in the nation after responses to changing times and the modern age like terrorism. Since Congress makes up only a small part of the government, the power of the state and local governments are being seen as negligible through the eyes of many students in both high school and middle school. Gentzel proposes that the current connotation of federalism in the classroom is associated with the word "federal", conjuring images of the executive branch and figureheads in Congress. A possible venue that might cause this skewed belief to change and realize the role of state and local governments might exist in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) bills passed by the House of Representatives and Senate. These acts, though not flawless, emphasize the role of local levels of government in giving public school education. Some groups like the National School Boards Association and their state school board association counterparts see this movement of power as more beneficial opposed to the current situation without acts like ESEA.
Analysis: The best definition of federalism is where every level of government works together for the benefit of the citizenry. In the exposition of this article, the ESEA represents a significant win in the legal world for proponents behind a more federalist power distribution like cooperative federalism in the creation and implementation of education systems in the United States. In fact, this article was originally published in the American School Board Journal earlier in this week of October, 2015, an organization dedicated to informing the public about school government and changes in policy that affect the growing generation of citizens. Although the exact intergovernmental relations proposed through this bill are still being figured out in the legal workplace, it seems natural for the state and local government to have more power in public education. This act is not evidence of devolution; rather, national legislation fails to incorporate the unique needs of towns, counties, or states that might be subject to special circumstances. Yet according to the Supremacy Clause, education legislation must be followed by all states in the nation. For example, the recent Common Core State Standards prove difficulty for different schools in which the overall population is not aiming for standardized "success in college" but rather working towards a trade or another kind of vocational technical educational path. Hopefully the ESEA passes with a precedent for future education legislation in which greater personalization state-by-state is possible with local government feedback and regulation in education delivery.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)