Answer one of the questions below on the 2008 elections results. Be sure to use news articles to back up your opinions.
-What does an Obama victory mean for the US? Why do you think he won?
-What suggestions do you have for the McCain campaign? What could his campaign have done better?
-What does it mean that MN voted for Obama and Coleman (who knows now), Paulsen, and Bachman (who are all Republicans)?
-What advice do you have for Republican representatives and senators in a Democratic Congress?
-What advice do you have for Obama (who is inheriting a financial crisis and 2 wars)? What do you think he should focus on in his first 6 months and for the 1st year?
-What is the significance of gaining our first African American president while in the same election 4 states added barriers to gay rights to their state constitutions?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
31 comments:
Right now, it seems the economy is the most important issue to the majority of Americans. After reviewing Obama’s proposed tax policy, it seems extremely inadequate. The average household income in the U.S. for 2007 was $50,233 (1). Obama’s tax plan calls for a tax cut to these families of $1,042 (2). This amount seems incredibly insignificant and unlikely to affect the willingness of American consumers to spend money. Another aim of Obama’s plan for the economy is to increase entrepreneurship. New companies are more valuable to the creation of jobs in metropolitan areas (3). The average metropolitan entrepreneur’s salary (just under $45,000 in 2001) is only slightly higher than the average salary overall ($40,668 in 2002) for a full-time male worker. This means that the average entrepreneur will most likely be in the same tax category as the average American family. A tax break of $1,042 would have nearly no effect on a small business. Hypothetically, if someone were to work for $10 an hour, plus $5 in benefits, this tax break wouldn’t even be able to pay for two weeks of work. Benefits for a worker making $10 an hour may cost less, but the difference in value to a business owner would be miniscule. In order to encourage small business growth, incentives need to be much more significant.
Concerning the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Obama needs to make troop withdrawal a priority. In doing so, he needs to communicate with American military leaders as well as Iraqi and Afghani leaders to make withdrawal a relatively quick process, but also one that transfers power to the new governments smoothly. Failure to cooperate with military and foreign leaders could result in the collapse of either of the still young governments.
The economy and wars need to be Obama’s biggest priorities. Both of these issues are very important to most Americans, especially those that voted for Obama. If Obama plans to institute the changes he talked about so much in his campaign, he needs to devote a significant amount of his time to trying to find solutions for both of these problems. Once the economy is back on track and people feel like the ends of the wars are within sight, Obama will be able to focus on other issues he feels are important.
1. http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/income_wealth/012528.html
2. http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/11/news/economy/candidates_taxproposals_tpc/index.htm>
3. http://www.kc.frb.org/RegionalAffairs/mainstreet/MSE_0904.pdf
Obama won the election for many reasons and his victory means a few different things for the United States.
There are many reasons explaining why Obama won the election. One is that the southern states are no longer the key to victory for the republicans because he won some of them (1). This allowed him to secure more than enough electoral votes and prevent McCain from getting those crucial southern states. Another reason is because he won over a majority of the American people with his speeches and personality (2). His upbeat and energized character spoke to many people and made them feel understood. He also won because of superior campaigning that extended to many often forgotten areas and appealed to all people in some way or another (3). His campaign strategy and organization were said to have made a significant impact on the outcome of the election. Another reason is because a majority of Americans are very dissatisfied with President Bush and felt the need for a switch from Republican to Democrat, in fear that any Republican president would be too much like Bush (4). In addition to that, Obama’s charismatic and articulate personality allowed him to embody change “to the point where Obama and change were synonymous” (4). The reason he tried to embody change is because he knew America was craving it. He knew that people were frustrated with the Bush administration and wanted an all around change. Therefore, he proposed to change the specific things that Americans are most dissatisfied with currently, such as economy. McCain could not separate himself with Bush enough to even compete with that.
Obama’s victory means a few major things for the United States. In the aspect of the election, it signifies the end of the “Old South” and Nixon’s “Southern strategy” (1). Usually a majority of the southern states vote republican, however in this election, Obama and the democrats created a “new south” (1). One reason to explain this is that many northern urbanites are moving to southern states, therefore making them more politically progressive (1). Obama’s victory also means that racism is not nearly as strong an issue as it has been in the past (1). His difference in race may have been another thing that signified change to many voters who are looking for lots of changes in government. It could also mean that while the racial issue is improving, the real reason is because Obama “won the hearts of the majority of Americans” and did not depend on race (2). Lastly, his victory means that America will soon be experiencing the proposed changes that allowed him to win the election and become the first African American president.
(1) http://www.dailynewstribune.com/opinion/x2046207524/Erbe-What-does-Barack-Obamas-win-mean
(2)http://media.www.theeastcarolinian.com/media/storage/paper915/news/2008/11/06/Opinion/Has-Race.Gone.Out.The.Window-3527812.shtml
(3) http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22859254/?GT1=10755
(4) http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1186479/why_obama_won.html
Barack Obama won the presidential election of 2008 for many reasons. One of these reasons was because the country was looking for change, and Obama’s campaign was a lot clearer in advocating that than John McCain’s was. Also, being linked to President Bush in general hurt McCain because of the country’s low approval of Bush. According to Politico.com, there were several keys to McCain’s defeat: He did not spend as much money on campaigning as Obama did, he didn’t embrace technology like YouTube to reach out to younger voters, his campaign had less organization, and the candidate, who would often smirk and shake his head during Obama’s speeches at the presidential debates, had less discipline in spite of all his experience. In addition, Obama surprisingly found support in the typically Republican states of North Carolina, Virginia, Florida, Ohio, and Indiana; the only states that McCain really dominated in were part of the deep south. These crucial votes played a big part in Obama’s landslide victory. But perhaps the most important win on Obama’s part was that of the moderate vote, which he garnered 60% of (1 talks about all of the above.) Moderate voters are always hard-fought for in elections because they can potentially be the people who decide the election, and they had a big part to play this time as well, as they were one of the top reasons why Obama won the election.
As for what having Obama as president will do for the country, some people believe that having a president like him will make our country stronger, as in “What doesn’t kill us makes us stronger” (2.) But I disagree with this. Since Obama is still fairly inexperienced with politics, it doesn’t automatically mean that America will be tested on whether it fails (and by fails I mean ceases to be a world power/country, period) under him or not. He’s just another president, but one with a different perspective compared to the seasoned veterans of politics (and more) that he was up against. This was one of the reasons he was elected, because he doesn’t seem to be like those people. Another thing that Obama will do for our country has actually already happened. The rest of the world has celebrated the fact of his election. Other countries have looked at us with a renewed sense of hope and respect for Americans, something that we dearly need after the Bush presidency. Some people actually began to see our current president as a terrorist-goader. Some nations, like South Africa, have even gone so far as to call Obama one of their own, because he is African American, and while they have warned each other not to expect too much from the president elect, other countries have been given hope by Barack Obama (3.) No one can deny how important hope can be in times like this.
1: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15301.html
2: http://www.inrich.com/cva/ric/opinion.apx.-content-articles-RTD-2008-11-09-0063.html
3: http://www.news24.com/City_Press/Columnists/0,,186-1695_2426926,00.html
First of all, I don’t think that McCain’s loss was a big surprise to anyone in America or around the world. Obama appealed to young people and was extremely effective at mobilizing this age group. Over 66 percent of people 18 to 29 voted for Obama (1). His campaign used the Internet and cell phone technology to make sure young people knew who he was. An 18 year old first time voter said that the reason he voted for Obama and not McCain was because “Obama appealed so much to the youth to make us feel like our voices count, we've grown to idolize him” (1). Other first time voter said that McCain lacked the charisma held by Barack Obama and was less likely to “restore America’s deteriorating image abroad” (1). In order to be successful, McCain would have needed to work harder to make sure young people saw him on an equal playing field as Obama. A two hour Saturday Night Live Election Special aired a clip of George W. Bush (played by Will Ferrell) strongly endorsing McCain. Bush says repeatedly that a vote for McCain is a vote for G.W. I think that this skit also portrays a real fear that American’s held regarding the McCain campaign. The Arizona senator was tied to Bush, because of their party membership and also some policies. If McCain were to be successful, he would have needed to cut his ties with the Bush Administration and take more moderate ground (3). Early in the election, McCain was succeeding at this, but choosing the strict conservative Sarah Palin for a running mate hurt any chance he had. Palin destroyed the McCain campaign in two major ways. First of all, she struggled with factual information during important televised interviews. This led to heavy criticism and made the McCain campaign look like a joke, thanks to contributions from Saturday Night Live. Palin also hurt McCain because she caused a lot of controversy within his campaign. His communication/press team and his policy advisors held very different feelings about Palin, this caused a lot of negativity and problems for the campaign as a whole (3). In a Time interview, McCain was said to be unresponsive to a lot of the questions regarding his campaign, this led many people to think he was unhappy with the way things were turning out (3). McCain would have been much more successful in the general election if he would have chosen more bipartisan, moderate running mate. Most Americans want change and they feared that by voting for McCain, they were asking for our country to keep going in the same direction as it currently is (1). The last thing that McCain could have changed in order to win the election has to do with money. McCain, unlike Obama, chose to use the public financing system. By opting into this, he faced an 84 million dollar spending limit, which put him at a significant disadvantage to Obama who used mass mobilization and a grass roots movement to make a record amount of donated money (2). All of these factors made a McCain victory highly unlikely for the 2008 election.
(1) http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/14/first.time.voters/index.html?iref=newssearch
(2) http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00006424
(3) http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OGIwNTU1OWJkOTYyYTVkYmMyNGFkNjZhOTQwM2FkMDI=
I think Obama’s main focus should be the financial crisis. While the war is another very important issue, the economic situation has a direct effect on Americans. When asked in a Gallup Poll what should be Obama’s top priority the people overwhelmingly responded the economy with 64% (4). While Iraq and Afghanistan came second, it only received 11% of the voted (4). Obama has promised to take financial action once he is in office and said that Congress must pass an economic stimulus measure just before or just after he takes office (1). He also wants unemployment benefits to be extended (1). He said one of the focuses will be producing jobs and actions to help the auto industry and small businesses (1). While Obama did state that the economic crisis would be his priority, on “The View” he said his top priorities would be Iraq, healthcare, and the climate (3). Others also state that the economy won’t stop Obama’s priorities like expanding health care, overhauling education and energy policy, and passing a middle-class tax cut (2). While these are important issues, I believe they don’t demand as much attention and aren’t in a crisis like the economy is. Many people do believe that Obama will be able to better the economy- 70% polled thought after his term they expect better economic conditions (5). However, 54% thought that he won’t be able to cut taxes for 95% of Americans like he claimed (5). However, it is unclear what exactly Obama plans to do to improve the economy when he takes office (5).
I think the economy should be Obama’s main priority during the first six months of his presidency and after he gets that in a direction of being stabilized, he should then focus on the war in his first year or presidency. He stated that for the war in the Middle East he would get all of the joint-chiefs of staff together to plan for a responsible withdrawal (3). The war in Iraq is definitely a top issue for Americans, yet only 23% think that his plan to remove almost all U.S. troops from Iraq without causing a major upheaval in Iraq is very likely to be successful (5). However, he wants to remove these troops to focus more on Afghanistan instead of Iraq (6). The war in Iraq was a cornerstone issue for his campaign and I think it will be one of the main focuses of his policies after the economy (6).
1. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/6099801.html
2. http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE4A81XQ20081109?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=10112
3. http://eyeblast.tv/public/video.aspx?v=Z4SU6U4z
4. http://pollingreport.com/prioriti.htm
5. http://pollingreport.com/obama.htm
6. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/21/obama.mideast/index.html
Barack Obama won a convincing victory on the basis of deep voter concerns about the state of the economy and strong disapproval of President Bush. He also benefited from overwhelming support from new voters and those under 30. Hispanic voters helped him win in several key states. (1) Many voters were worried about the poor condition of the economic stage right now and Obama was far more successful than McCain in convincing voters that he was better able to handle the economic crisis. (1) A major problem for McCain was widespread negative feelings toward President Bush, who half of all voters strongly disapproved of the way Bush is handling his job and believed that McCain would continue Bush’s policies which led their votes to be cast to Obama. (1) Obama won all of the Democratic states as well as 8 Bush states from his endless campaigning to states that weren’t originally Democratic. Obama was also able to raise a huge amount of money about $639 million compared to McCain’s $335 million. (2) With the great amount of money he had he was able to open more offices, hirer more staff, and get a great amount of volunteers who were able to spread his campaign even further. (2) Obama was also able to get 95% of the black vote and also two thirds of the votes cast by Hispanics, a 13% gain over Kerry’s total in 2004. (1) I think that Obama won was because he reached out to all kinds of people through technology, such as the youtube videos, and also his campaign focused on change, something that Americans want especially what has happened in the past 8 years.
Obama’s victory means new changes and a new start to rebuild the country again. His victory is the beginning of a new cycle of openness to liberal initiatives. Obama’s policies will focus on the American people to make our country great again and take less focus on the war. Having majority of America voted for a African American President elect shows how far we have come away from the past on racial prejudice.
(1)http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/05/politics/main4572555.shtml
(2)http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4576874n
There are a variety of reasons why McCain did not pull through a victor in the 2008 election, and many of them are obvious. McCain’s campaign strategy played a big role in his loss. From the beginning his chances were reduced with the unequal amounts of campaign spending. While McCain accepted the FEC’s spending cap, Obama did not and was able to exceed his spending by about seven times with a rough total of $650 million (1). While McCain was able to get around many of these limits and still raised a harrowing amount of money, he was never able to compete with Obama who had unlimited access to advertising and campaigning. Obama’s advantage of money allowed him to influence states John McCain could have normally relied on, impeding his ability to try to get swing states (1). The McCain Campaign’s use of negative advertisements also hindered their success. While it was proven that McCain only used 10% more of purely negative advertisement, it was shown to cut deeper and have more of an impact on citizens. This was because McCain’s attacks focused more on personal issues like Obama’s supposed affiliation with the terrorist William Ayers, which only ended up hurting McCain’s reputation (1). McCain’s last hope at success was the presidential debates, where he planned to crack Obama and reveal his great lack of experience. This plan also backfired when Obama remained unnaturally calm, and McCain’s attempts to ignite him made him look like the hot head (1). Another decision McCain made that proved to hurt him was his choice of Sarah Palin for his vice presidential candidate. McCain was losing the right-wing evangelical vote, so he brought Sarah Palin under his wing. This decision refuted one of McCain’s strongest arguments against Obama since Sarah Palin also had no national or foreign experience (1). Many people also felt that McCain gave up many of his opinions and original policies. Anne Applebaum, a columnist for Washington Post, claimed that she was going to vote for McCain because of his intelligence in foreign policy, his courage to tackle immigration, and his outspoken hatred of fiscal conservatism (2). Her opinion changed when she felt he had turned into “mush”, beginning to run away from his previously strong opinions (2). Another obvious reason McCain was the under dog from the beginning was his connection to George Bush. While he tried his hardest to separate himself from the previous president, declaring he was a Maverick and giving examples of how he had gone his own way in the past, there was no getting around the fact that he was overall a loyal republican that had supported Bush (1). Any hope McCain had of pulling through victorious was shattered with the devastating economy. Everyone associated the republicans and their policies with our horrible situation, and there was no chance for him to lose that reputation (1). While McCain is well-respected, he was thought of by many Americans as a leader of the past. They are ready for “change”, and Barack Obama served them this slogan on a platter.
1) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/us_elections_2008/7704246.stm
2)http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/27/AR2008102702406.html
I am answering the question “What does an Obama victory mean for the US? Why do you think he won?”
An Obama victory means that we will see a lot of the current policies reversed to a much different approach. For example, the plan for the economy under Obama will change from the Bush Administration’s trickle-down effect to a tax relief program for lower and middle classes, and an increase in taxes for groups and individuals making over $250,000 annually (1). In terms of energy, the Bush Administration focused on finding more sources of oil in areas like the Middle East while Obama plans to work towards energy independence by researching more alternative fuel sources which will also create jobs (6).
There are many reasons Obama won the election, one of them being like I said about Obama reversing current policies to a more liberal approach. Many voters view the Democratic Party as the party of change, and change is what people want right now (2). Democrats are also viewed as the more sympathetic party to working class and lower-income citizens, and they are the groups making up the majority of the population (3). Also many people likely voted retrospectively against the Republican Party because people are angry at the Bush Administration (4). According to a poll in October 2008, 67% wanted Bush’s administration to be over (5). Another reason I think Obama won is because of the way the increased voter turnout worked out. According to research by political scientists, people are less likely to vote if they are happy with the way things are (7). If they are unhappy, voter turnout is going to go up so they can encourage the change they want, and Obama offered the most change to voters. Overall, I think the election of Obama is going to mean 4 years of a lot of reforming which will hopefully get our country back on track.
Sources
1. http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/
2. http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08a.htm
3. http://people-press.org/report/124/republicans
4. Government in America, twelfth edition, page 318.
5. http://www.pollingreport.com/bush.htm
6. http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/newenergy
7. Government in America, twelfth edition.
I am responding to the McCain campaign and saying what I think they should have done and what they could have done better. First, I would say that they ran way too many negative advertisements. They constantly ran ads that attacked all of there opponents. I don’ think I ever really saw an ad that was promoting there ideas, just attacking the Democrats. I saw ads that attacked the big government policies, and many that attacked Al Franken and his past career as a comedian. Even Norm Coleman denounced the advertisements, and asked for the campaign to stop running them (1). I think that these negative ads hurt the Republican campaign and there support from undecided voters.
One thing that many people say was a mistake made by the Republican campaign was the appointment of Sarah Palin as the Vice Presidential candidate. I disagree wit this for the most part. I think that the Republican campaign had to change something and get some attention. They wanted to solidify support from the Evangelical Christians and the Republican base, and I think that they accomplished that. It just turned out bad in the end. As they say, hindsight is 20/20. But at her nomination, she had an approval rating of 52 percent, around that of McCain and Obama (2). So it wasn’t that bad of a nomination at the beginning. The only problem was she got harassed by the media a lot, mostly on her inexperience, and that caused her approval ratings to drop to 42 percent (2). The media sort of attacked Palin personally, and the Republican campaign could have tried to hide her form the media. But again, I think that they needed to get her out there in order to get attention to the campaign. So I don’t think that it was that bad of a decision, it just turned out bad.
The main thing that hurt the McCain campaign wasn’t even there fault. President Bush was the main reason why the McCain campaign lost the election. The Bush administration was the one who was in when the economy crashed, and who caused many to disapprove of the war. With all of these problems, Bush’s approval rating dropped fro 90 percent in 2002 to 27 percent now (3). With so few people approving of a Republican president, how can the Republicans win the next race? Even Sarah Palin said that the main reason for there loss was Bush, not the campaign (4). I think that it was impossible for the Republicans to win in this election because of the public’s disapproval of Bush. How can you win when everyone already knows they don’t want to support you before you even start campaigning? They tried to separate themselves from Bush the best that they could, but in the end they are from the same party, so they will be connected to the same ideas, plans and policies. So in general, I think that the Republican campaign could have done a better job raising money and putting out advertisements, but I don’t think it would have changed the outcome of the election.
Sources:
1) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/10/norm-coleman-pulling-down_n_133692.html
2)http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7123163
3) http://www.gallup.com/poll/110806/Bushs-Approval-Rating-Drops-New-Low-27.aspx
4) http://newscompass.blogspot.com/2008/10/sarah-palin-blames-george-bush-for.html
I think that Obama definitely has a lot of work ahead of him to get this country back on track, but if I could give him some advice I would tell him to take it slow and try not to do too much at once. This country needs a lot of help, but it is important that he puts 100% in a few big things first otherwise things can get ignored and slip through the cracks. I think that the first thing on his agenda should be the economy. With our economy in shambles like it is now, I believe that fixing it should be Obama’s number one priority. His plan is quite different from Bush’s, so hopefully it will bring our country back to a prosperous one. Obama spent the last few weeks before the election campaigning on his economic plan (1), which is a large reason why many people voted for him. I think that he should focus on what Americans want first. Obama’s economic plan consists of three big short term goals: 1.new $50 billion stimulus program, which will help extend unemployment insurance beyond the current 26-week limit and helping struggling state governments, 2. a more aggressive foreclosure-prevention effort, with $10 billion in funding, 3. and a tax cut for Americans making less than $150,000 a year while increasing those for people making more than $150,000 a year (1). On Obama’s website he laid his plan out very plainly but thoroughly. He said that he and Biden promise to lower middle class family taxes, provide tax relief for small businesses and startups, and fight for fair trade policies (2). He seems to have very well thought out and carefully planned ideas to help our economy. I think that Obama should spend the first six months of his presidency following through on these promises and focusing all his attention on the issue.
After those six months are up, our economy will hopefully be in better shape. Obama will be able to spend less time on the economy and more on the war efforts.the war is also an important issue for our country right now. There are many troops risking their lives overseas and it seems like often times they are forgotten about. There are a lot of mixed feelings about the war in Iraq, but I think that it is important for our country to stay strong and united in whatever the president chooses to do. Obama has said that he finds the war in Iraq a “dangerous distraction” and that our focus should be on Afghanistan (3). He wants to get the troops out of Iraq by summer of 2010 and then start to send at least two more brigades to Afghanistan. Obama says that his war strategy lies on these five goals: "ending the war in Iraq responsibly, finishing the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban, securing all nuclear weapons and materials from terrorists and rogue states, achieving true energy security and rebuilding our alliances to meet the challenges of the 21st century." (3) He has been very vocal in his opposition to the war, so I believe that he will follow through and end the war quickly.
1. http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1812964,00.html
2. http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/
3. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/15/obama.iraq/index.html
This November, the United States of America both elected our first African American president and supported a woman’s presence on the presidential ballot. The air buzzed as millions reveled at the significance of the election. But for many in California, this year’s civil rights progress was bittersweet. Proposition 8 was passed in the state by a 52% vote (2). This proposition overturned the state’s earlier Supreme Court decision that legalized gay marriage (1). This was a shock, as California was seen widely as the most accepting of homosexual couples. Irony weaved its way into the election as the same Americans who voted for a black president and a female vice president, voted against rights for gay couples (2). 70% of African Americans in California voted for Proposition 8 (2). In Florida, a similar measure passed, with support of 61% of women, and 71% of African Americans. Arkansas passed a measure denying homosexual people the right to adopt children (2). What does it mean when two sects of America so long suppressed by society vote to restrict the rights of another group? Why did women and African Americans make the transition from the oppressed to the oppressors? (2)
Supporters of proposition 8 find California’s vote to be evidence that the issue is a moral, rather than civil rights, based. They encouraged Californians to vote in favor of Proposition 8 on the grounds that if it wasn’t passed, the traditional family structure would disintegrate (3). Their slogan encourages voters to “protect their children” (3). But protect them from what? The reality that homosexual people and couples exist?
The fact that the majority of California voted against allowing gay marriage is proof that homophobia still exists and pervades throughout even the most liberal states. Homosexuals have an even longer road to equality now that their beacon of hope, California, has been almost extinguished. As long as homosexuals are not given equal rights, they will not be given equal respect. So, although America took steps this November towards ending racism and sexism, there is still room to make a freer America.
Here is my question. How is the United States worse off today as a result of giving African Americans rights? By giving women rights? Should we, as members of the land of the free, deny people rights we possess, just because they aren’t the same as us? Should we stick to the status quo because we’re afraid of what will happen if we don’t? What does America find so wrong with an idea of a family different from that which we hold today? The fact that it’s not what we’ve known to be true? And is a fear of straying from tradition a good enough reason to oppress an entire group of people?
I suppose an even better question is: When will America learn?
1. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=96810100
2. http://www.examiner.com/x-558-Politics-Examiner~y2008m11d15-Lessons-Unlearned
3. http://www.protectmarriage.com/
What does an Obama victory mean for the US? Why do you think he won?
Excitement has been brewing across the nation as Americans get ready for Barack Obama to become the next president. While for most of the campaign McCain and Obama were extremely close, Obama came out victorious. I honestly think that regardless of who was running on the Republican ticket, the Democratic party would have won. This is because Obama ran a campaign for change in the midst of a financial crisis and ongoing wars that were greatly displeasing to a large portion of the American people. When polled, 8 out of every 10 Americans said they were dissatisfied about where our nation is going (5). This shows the overwhelming need for change that McCain didn’t seem to provide. While doubts loomed among the nation at the beginning of the campaign that Obama was inexperienced, his tech-savvy, disciplined, and methodical campaign earned the trust of many voters (5). Also, it was hard for McCain to call Obama “inexperienced” when he chose Sarah Palin as a vice-presidential candidate, who has little foreign policy experience (5) and seemed to blow almost every interview she had. I personally believe that money played a huge part in Obama’s success, and the fact that he raised about $700 million (5) was evident in the countless commercials and advertisements trying to sway the uninformed voter. The failed Bush-Cheney administration as a whole for the past 8 years sent many voters to the polls with a desire for the change Obama flawlessly emphasized throughout his campaign (1). McCain, a smart man with much political experience, was seen as a scapegoat right away for many voters who were just sick of the way Bush was handling the wars and the economy (4). I feel that because he accepted the spending cap on his campaign, he was disadvantaged in the days closest to the election when Obama still had the resources to sway on-the-fence voters right up until the last minute.
In addition to Obama’s successful campaign strategy, I feel that he was successful because many people blamed incumbent Bush for the mess that they country is in (5). People who had never registered as a Democrat in their lives did for the first time this year because of the national disgust with Bush (2). They not only voted into the White House a Democratic candidate, but ensured Democratic majorities in Congress as well (5), signifying the readiness for change and a fresh start. Young voters and voters who wanted to elect the nation’s first black president also were drawn to Obama (2). Obama did not, however, win the majority of the white vote, largely due to the conservative white south (3). He won 95% of the black vote as well as the majority of the Hispanic vote (3). This is extremely important because it shows that the white majority is no longer in control of the power to elect a president, which is a turning point for minorities in America. Not only did they elect their favored candidate, but their candidate is himself a minority. For the US, this means that as a country we have come very far in the quest for equality and civil rights. Americans are now concerned little with racial identity and more about the economic crisis (4). His plans to end the war in Iraq and deal with the financial crisis will mean more governmental regulated programs to create jobs and provide services for the poor and working class.
1.) http://blogs.kansascity.com/unfettered_letters/2008/11/why-obama-won-e.html
2.) http://www.thestate.com/politics/story/591503.html
3.) http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/opinion/102650.php
4.) http://nation.ittefaq.com/issues/2008/11/16/news0343.htm
5.) http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/10/politics/main4589947.shtml
From the second that Barack Obama is inaugurated, he will have important issues to tackle and will have difficult decisions to make. And even before he is inducted into office, he will be involved with the presidency. President Bush has already invited him to speak with him about the issues the county is facing (1). With all the things that this county is facing, it is important that the President and President Elect are already trying to figure out a plan of action. Even though there are many important issues to discuss right now, the economic status probably dominated the discussion (1). I think that within Obama’s first 100 days, he will have to make a dent in the national deficit and make progress with the war or else he will lose some of the support he has currently. The country is all about change right now, and if it does not come quickly enough, the Obama administration will hear people’s opinions. Also a HUGE thing that Obama needs to do quickly is to ensure the people that America is back on the right track and is working on the behalf of the common good (1). He needs to bring the people together and to unite them under the common good. The NYTimes stated that Obama’s team has been struggling with whether to only focus on the Economic issue, or try and tackle the health care, and climate change, and energy independence issues all at the same time (2). They also asked, “Is it too much for the president to be ambitious?” In an interview with CNN, Obama stated that the economy would be his number 1 priority, with energy, health care, tax restructuring, and education as second through his fifth priorities (2). President Obama will have much support in the first months of his presidency from all those democrats who were fed up with the Bush administration for 8 years, so it is important for him to act quickly and to take advantage of his mandate (2). He can not afford to wait too long to pass bills, because many of the controversial ones will be much harder to pass once his mandate has faded. Throughout his campaign, Obama also talked about pulling our troops out of Iraq which should be an issue that he focuses on because right now we are spending $10 million a day unnecessarily. I am excited to see how he handles the presidency within the first 100 days, 6 months, and his first year and know I’m not the only one who is excited.
1. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/09/obama.transition/index.html#cnnSTCText
2. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/09/us/politics/09promises.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=Obama%27s%20first%20100%20days&st=cse&oref=slogin
“Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." This 14-word statement was added to the California State Constitution as a result of this past election. Known as Proposition 8 on the ballot, it was passed decisively with 52.2% of the popular vote [3]. Its passage came as a surprise to many, especially considering it overturned a May 2008 decision by the State Supreme Court that legalized gay marriage. Since that decision, 18,000 same-sex couples have gotten married [5]. While their status is not addressed in the Proposition, many of these couples are worried about controversies that are bound to come up about their marriage status. The CA Attorney General supports their status, but there are many issues that will probably end up in litigation [5]. California is popularly known to be much more liberal and accepting of homosexuality than most of the rest of the nation. It is interesting that Californians voted overwhelmingly for Barack Obama, showing a near-complete acceptance of minority civil rights, yet essentially denied rights to the new minority group of gays and lesbians.
Gay marriage was not a very important topic in this election as the economic crisis overshadowed almost every other issue. However, both presidential candidates did express their viewpoints. McCain believes that marriage is a union between one man and one woman. However, he also believes that state and local governments should be able to set their own policies and that the federal government should stay out of the issue [1]. Obama also opposes same-sex marriage, but he also opposes a constitutional ban. His campaign did support full civil unions, which gives same-sex couples equal legal rights and privileges [1].
One point of interest in this election concerns who voted for Proposition 8. On an NPR talk show, one of the guests mentioned how most of the coalition of black voters, almost all of whom were Obama supporters, voted yes for the initiative. According to exit polls, 7 in 10 of African-American voters supported the proposition, and 75% of African American women supported it [5]. In a way, African-Americans are being scapegoated for the passage of the proposition. Even so, the scapegoating has caused some trouble at the rallies, where statements such as “Shame on you, you should know what this is like” were heard [5]. I was astonished when I heard that on the talk show – I feel like it is such a horrible thing to bring back the troubles of the civil rights movement – especially considering that many people don’t believe that it actually was the black vote which tipped the scale in favor of Proposition 8. To support that, people cite the source of the funding for Yes for 8 – much of which did not come from the black community [4].
There are two things out of this which I believe are very significant. The first is the amazing level of division and contradiction in our country. A recent poll showed that public support of gay marriage has been increasing moderately. From 2004 to now, support for gay marriage has increased from 32% to 36% [2]. Support for civil unions also increased from 48% last August to 53% now. There has also been a decline in support of a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, decreasing from 35% in August 2004 to 29% today [2]. Although these numbers show a national tendency of expanding rights, 30 states now have state constitutional amendments or statutes that ban gay marriage [5]. Some other states also will not recognize gay marriages from other states, causing controversy with the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution. The second point of significance concerns the role of campaigns and candidate image. Looking back, it seems that the Yes of 8 campaign was better organized and centralized. They also had effective advertisements, albeit a “disinformation campaign” according to some [4]. The Christian right sent out the message that without Proposition 8, churches would be forced to perform same-sex unions, schools would teach homesexuality, and that Barack Obama had said “I’m not in favor of gay marriage.” [4] This last bit shows again how advertising and linking an issue to a popular candidate is effective. While the McCain-Palin ticket suffered from links to Bush, Proposition 8 was rewarded by a tie to Obama.
[1] - http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.samesexmarriage.html
[2] - http://people-press.org/report/253/abortion-and-rights-of-terror-suspects-top-court-issues
[3] - http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-prop816-2008nov16,0,1953656,full.story
[4] - http://www.alternet.org/rights/106178/why_the_prop_8_gay_marriage_ban_won/
[5]- http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=96810100
I think Obama should try to accomplish multiple goals on his agenda by one plan. I think using an alternative energy program to generate jobs would help the economy. Obama’s plan would create five million new jobs (1). Due to the recent unemployment figures, over half a million, job creation would greatly help the economy (2). Alternative energy would also help to ease the United States dependence on foreign oil (3). If we were not as dependent on foreign oil, the United States would be able to change their foreign policy to be less focused on the Middle East oil suppliers. The United States has always been interested in securing control of oil in the Middle East. Some people say the United States went into Iraq to gain control of the oil reserves (4).
I also think Obama should try to adhere to his goals in his Blueprint for Change. The voters elected him for his goals and so he should endeavor to complete these goals. Also, I think Obama should try to listen to foreign governments more. Governments have already started calling and recommending plans to Obama (5). I think to reestablish America’s credibility, it is important for Obama and his advisers to listen to foreign governments.
I think Obama should focus his priorities on what the American people want him to focus on. Personally, I think the first priority is stabilizing the economy as do 84% of Americans (7). He plans on focusing on a second stimulus package (9). He has also stated he will focus on preventing more home foreclosures (10). I think he can do this by incorporating his plans for alternative energy and increased infrastructure. I think Obama’s second priority should be adjusting the United States foreign policy. He can do this by changing policies in Iraq and Afghanistan. Also, Obama can begin opening discussion with other countries. He has stated he will begin changing polices on January 21 (8). His third priority should be adjusting the health care policies in the United States. Fifty percent of people view this as a number one priority (7).
There are many other priorities that people think Obama should focus on. Some think he should focus on closing the Guantanamo Bay detention center (6).
(1) http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/11/amid-doom-synth.html
(2) http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122658250523224291.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
(3) http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Living-on-borrowed-time-LFQTQ?OpenDocument&src=sph
(4) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/4354269.stm
(5) http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/14/washington/14policy.html?ref=us
(6) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/11/12/ST2008111200035.html
(7) http://www.tdn.com/articles/2008/11/15/election/doc491b58a6a0229561404803.txt
(8) http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g3qAgZKA_K3l0O_E38cDCsg9Kgzg
(9) http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-na-transition8-2008nov08,0,2375667.story
(10) http://www.upi.com/Entertainment_News/2008/11/15/Obama_Foreclosures_a_top_priority/UPI-57461226773363/
What do you get when you combine one part mismanagement, one part association with President Bush and two parts failed economy? The recipe for disaster that was John McCain’s 2008 Presidential campaign. McCain did not lose to Obama for one reason alone, but rather a combination of “ingredients” that America cooked up and taste-tested before casting their vote on November 4th.
It all started eight years ago when Bush was elected to become one of the worst presidents this nation will ever see. Throughout his career, Bush’s approval ratings have dropped, from over 90% at the beginning of “Operation Enduring Freedom” (that was still Afghanistan, remember) to a pathetic 23% at the beginning of October, with no end of the “war” in sight (1). One problem for McCain’s campaign this year was this association: Bush=Republican, McCain=Republican. When voters reached the booths this November, as some analysts put it, Bush was McCain’s other opponent (2). McCain did his best distancing himself from Bush with such things as stressing unilateralism in international relations and his verbal detestation of war, yet the promise of a continued occupation of Iraq did nothing to quiet the uncomfortable Bush laugh still ringing in many voters’ ears (3).
Since the beginning of his campaign, McCain has allowed himself to be mismanaged. It turns out, as many voters would not suspect, that McCain is a likeable guy, very humble and quite funny. Such an example can be viewed at the following link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Goaj5V4tZoc. Pay attention to this bit:
McCain: I don't want it getting out of this room, but my opponent is an impressive fellow in many ways. Political opponents can have a little trouble seeing the best in each other. But I've had a few glimpses of this man at his best and I admire his great skill, energy and determination. It's not for nothing that he's inspired so many folks in his own party and beyond… I can’t wish my opponent luck, but I do wish him well.
How can McCain say that, after his campaign repeatedly attempted to draw ties from Obama to radicals like Ayers and Obama’s pastor… hmmmm. Funny, I forgot his name already…. In all seriousness, though, this technique could have serious consequences in the upcoming months. In leading voters against Obama’s character instead of his stance on issues, McCain’s campaign has made some nervous about what is to come. Some Americans don’t understand that Obama isn’t a terrorist and that calling him so was all part of the election “game”(6).
The final blow that would drop McCain’s campaign to its knees, gasping for breath and begging for mercy, was the economy. As McCain jokingly said “I'm told that at the first sign of recovery [of the economy], he will suspend his campaign and fly immediately to Washington to address this crisis.”(4). Over the summer, McCain had said “the fundamentals of the economy are strong” (5). His incorrect analysis of the current economic situation was devastating. Oh, and did I mention that he’s in the same political party as Bush?
In summary, Bush=McCain, McCain allowed his campaign to be mismanaged (even with all that experience of his), and the economy went in the toilet. I could close with a continuation of the first paragraph’s food metaphor, but I fear it’s gone a bit stale. We’ll simply have to sit back and see how President Elect Barack Obama does when he takes the lead in January.
p.s.- notice how I didn't mention Palin at all? She was a non-factor. (7)
(1) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/custom/2006/02/02/CU2006020201345.html
(2) http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=e05da19c-1eb6-463c-bd1b-94f009fc724d
(3) http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/post_27.html
(4) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Goaj5V4tZoc
(5) http://www.nation.co.ke/News/world/-/1068/488756/-/ryuth7/-/
(6) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bss6lTP8BJ8
(7)http://burmadigest.info/2008/09/26/the-palin-non-factor/
MN voted for Obama as President but chose Coleman, Paulsen and Bachman for congress. This means that there is more split ticket voting and people are not voting based on party preferences only (1). Split ticket voting is voting with one party for one office, but voting with another party for another office.
Some scholars theorized that people split ticket vote on purpose; so that they may achieve balance between the opposing parties policy positions (1). For example, a person may vote Republican for senate because of their views on drilling in Alaska, but then the person may vote Democratic for President because of their views on government spending and welfare. Another reason for an increase in split ticket voting is simply because people are identifying less with parties (1). More people are becoming moderate and therefore looking at specific policies of candidates and voting for the ones that match theirs closest (1). This can be both good and bad as less people identify strongly with a particular party. It is good because people are actually looking at the issues and voting based on which candidate they think will better satisfy their views. Split ticket voting is bad though because it harms the two party system. There are more moderates that identify with and support neither party, weakening the two majority parties. Independent parties will be given a greater chance to win elections if people are voting only based on policies compared to voting for a party.
Split ticket voting’s major consequence is a resulting divided government. A divided government is when one party controls the presidency and another party controls congress. There are differing views to whether divided government is good or bad. One would assume that divided government is always bad because it impedes and slows legislation because congress and the president don’t get along (2). On the other hand, divided government provides an additional system of checks and balances because congress will be more likely to be able to group together and stop the president or vice versa (2). Divided government is likely to result in a smaller increase in spending compared to an undivided government (3). This is because the other party will reject spending that seems wasteful or excessive to them, creating a more efficient government following a policy of fiscal restraint (3). Apparently unified governments are more likely to lead us into a war (3). A Democratic president was backed by a Democratic congress in World War I, World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War (3). This is an example of the powers of checks and balances of a divided government because the party controlling congress will be less likely to agree with the president, from another party, to declare war. Last of all, a divided government makes it more likely that a major reform will be passed and will survive past the term of the president (3). This happens because a major reform or change requires bipartisan support of a bill. If the president can get the support of congress that means that the other party agrees with the legislation. So in the future when the president finishes his term and the other party takes control of the government, the legislation will remain because they agreed on it when it was passed; instead of a unified government forcing reforms on, only to be dismantled when the other party took over.
1) http://www.princeton.edu/~csdp/events/pdfs/seminars/Carmines092806.pdf
2) http://wiki.idebate.org/index.php/Debate:_Divided_government_in_the_United_States#Governance:_Does_divided_government_offer_better_governance.3F
3) http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2006/0610.niskanen.html
-What does it mean that MN voted for Obama and Coleman (who knows now), Paulsen, and Bachman (who are all Republicans)?
The 2008 election was one of great changes. The first African American election was elected, and it is the first time in twenty years that a Bush or Clinton has not been the executive. While Minnesota went predictably democratic in the presidential race as it has since 1972 (1), republicans were elected as well. I think that this means that while people are proclaiming that they are ready to embrace change, they are still hesitant about giving the Democrats full control.
The election results for this year are a perfect example of split-ticket voting. According to some scholars split-ticket voting occurs because voters want to achieve balance in the party’s policy positions (2). This makes sense to me, especially in the case of this election because Obama is more liberal than many moderates would like him to be. They cast their vote for him as president, but then for congress members of the opposite party to ensure checks and balances. Another reason given for split ticket voting is the different representation levels (2). One party may deliver more benefits to a certain district and the other party more benefits to the nation.
What was surprising to me was the varying degree of the Republican victories. In what was anticipated to be a close race, Erik Paulsen won with close to an eight point victory over Ashwin Madia (3). Michele Bachmann and Al Tinklenberg’s race was much closer though, and she was helped by the Independent Party candidate winning such a large percentage of the vote (3). The impossibly close race between Coleman and Franken has yet to be decided and was the most highly contested. The split ticket voters are crucial for victory in elections, but unpredictable. They represent a small but distinct percentage of voters and thus make campaigns work harder to appeal to more people (4).
While the 2008 election results show that Minnesotans are ready for change in the oval office, they are a bit more hesitant when it comes to congress. Some consistency has been maintained with the reelection of two Republican incumbents, and the election of a new Republican to fill a vacated seat. Although we seem to be ready to chart a new course for the nation, we are not ready to give complete control to one party. It will be very interesting to see what our Republican congress peoples roles will be in the new Democratic administration.
1. http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/polls/2004-09-15-minn.htm
2. http://www.princeton.edu/~csdp/events/pdfs/seminars/Carmines092806.pdf
3. http://electionresults.sos.state.mn.us/ElecRslts.asp?M=CGS&CD=03
4. http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/president/33421749.html
What does an Obama victory mean for the US? Why do you think he won?
I think, above all, that Obama’s victory means change for the US. Undoubtedly, it means that the next four years will be ones of great change and new public policy. Alex Koppelman, a reporter for The War Room section of Salon.com asked people what they thought Obama’s victory means for the US. A professor at Georgetown University, Michael Kazin’s answer sounded hopeful; “It means that the conservative era is over, and a progressive one has a chance to begin,” and he was not alone (1). Many others sureyed sounded optimistic about Obama’s plans for America’s future, saying Obama’s presidency will bring an end to the “nightmare” that started with Nixon, and that now our nation is truly done with racial discrimination (I think that person is going to be very sad when their prediciton is wrong) (1). Obama’s election means huge changes in our economy; from tax-cuts to the creation of new jobs, Obama has some pretty big plans for America (3). Some of these plans, like all the tax cuts, make me nervous (because I don’t see how he plans on starting all these new programs and cutting taxes at the same time…won’t that just push our national debt higher?), but I hope for America’s sake that it all turns out (3).
Obama’s foreign policy plans concerning Iran and securing nuclear weapons sound much more diplomatic than his predecessor’s(2). While I am 100% an advocate for using peaceful methods to get what we want as a country, unfortunately I feel that Iran will not really be phased by the US stepping up “our economic pressure and political isolation,” (2). Let’s face it, Iran has valuable leverage; oil (4). I don’t think Iran will take us seriously and I think the US has to stop thinking of itself as the world police concerning nuclear weapons.
It is my greatest hope that Obama’s plans for change will mean great things for our country and that our nation is in for a new era.
I feel that Obama getting elected shouldn’t really come as much of a surprise to anyone. With economists calling our current situation the worst since the Great Depression and people fearing the worst for our country’s economy, and former president Franklin Delano Roosevelt successfully got us out of the Great Depression, so it makes sense that we turned to another Democratic president to get us out of this pickle.
Another reason that I feel Obama was elected is because the American people in general are sick of the Republican party. Bush has tarnished people’s views of conservativism and people just want something new, thinking nothing could be worse than what we have had for the past eight years. I sincerely hope that the American voters have made a good choice because It will be our generation who has to deal with the consequences.
(1) http://www.salon.com/politics/ war_room/2008/11/06/meaningful_mom ent/index.html?source=rss
(2)http://origin.barackobama.com/ issues/foreign_policy/
(3) http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/
(4) https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ir.html
I think Obama is going to have to focus his attention on the current economic crisis before he can deal with other issues. On Friday November 7, Obama held his first press conference to address mainly the economic crisis. Currently, a Summit is being held in Washington to plan a solution to the economic downturn (1). He is also currently urging Congress to pass a “Down payment” on a rescue plan next plan (1). At this point, most people are in mutual agreement that the government needs to take charge and increase their involvement in the economy. With unemployment reaching 6.5 percent, global concern over the economy is on the rise (2).
While the economy seems to be the focus of the majority of our attention, there are many people who do have other concerns they want to be dealt with. Obama's aides say that his other priorities (expanding health care, improving education, energy policy, ect. ) won't be ignored. (3). John Podesta, co-chair of Obama's transition team, says that his priorities tie in with the economic crisis (3). It is true that some families will are struggling to balance their money between food and medical bills. Expanding health care and making it more affordable will ease the financial burdens of many families. However with an drastically increasing deficit, Obama will have to prioritize on what programs will be given money.
In a CBS interview, Obama states that National security is among his top priorities (4). He believes that there is a higher probability that terrorist might try to attack the US during this transitional period between administrations (4). He also wants to lower the number of troops in Iraq and stop terrorists than are currently in Afghanistan (4). His priority in the war on terror is to capture or kill Osama Bin Laden, leader of plots to harm the US (4).
He also promised in the same CBS interview to shut down Guantanamo Bay and ban torture by the military (5). Our nation has continually claimed that we do not torture, which has been proven false by Guantanamo Bay and the practice of extraordinary rendition. International efforts have made calls to us to shut down Guantanamo Bay for years. Other nations view the existence of Guantanamo Bay as hypocritical of the beliefs and rights we give to our people. His pledge to close the former military base will likely please foreign nations and improve our perception and relations.
(1)http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-11-16-voa14.cfm
(2)http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jXgIsKXJlO8AhG79r_OKcV6WhHKQD94E4NUO2
(3)http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed2/idUSN09399152
(4)http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jYH1oe-N2wDNBQpIdUakDCGOp5YgD94GBBF80
(5)http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/obama-will-close-guantanamo-bay-1021731.html
What is the significance of gaining our first African American president while in the same election 4 states added barriers to gay rights to their state constitutions?
Obama’s victory is an important one for everyone. “He believes talent is created and distributed equally, therefore making all people equal. And, furthermore, he understands the antiquated policy of "don't ask, don't tell" for the U.S. military should be repealed as soon as possible.” (1) He feels that the loyalty and service of a member in the army is more important than sexual orientation. Being equal does not constitute unequal and discriminatory marriage laws. I don’t believe that Obama’s victory will lead to any more barriers to gay rights. The election was not focused on gay rights, therefore it is irrelevant that four states banned rights, and the timing has nothing to do with the election results. “Obama supported gay rights during his Illinois Senate tenure. He sponsored legislation in Illinois that would ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.”(2) I don’t see what will have changed his mind on gay marriage, and seeing as Obama is a minority he knows what its like to be discriminated against.
Obama does not approve of gay marriage completely. He approves of civil unions, and the right of each state to determine marriage laws. I believe that Obama will not hurt, nor advance the rights of same sex couples. “Giving them a set of basic rights would allow them to experience their relationship and live their lives in a way that doesn't cause discrimination," Obama said. "I think it is the right balance to strike in this society."(2) That being said, the attitude of California puts a damper on civil rights advancements.
A proposition recently passed in California presents a roadblock to same sex marriages. “Proposition 8 is a statewide ballot proposition in California. On November 4, 2008, voters approved the measure and made same-sex marriage illegal in California.” (4) This was clearly a crushing defeat for gay rights activists. I believe that there is hope for gay rights still. The type of voter who showed up and voted for Proposition 8 is important to its implications. “Not only was the black vote weighted heavily in favor of Proposition 8, but black turnout -- spurred by Barack Obama's campaign for president -- was unusually large, making up roughly 10% of the voters.”(3) This may not reflect the amount of interest or opposition that will arise in reguards to gay marriage. These voters could easily just have been voting to advance the rights of blacks.
This election was a weird one, and there was so much going on during it, that drawing conclusions as to why something happened or didn’t is fruitless. It’s hard to tell at this point what will happen with gay marriage, the war in Iraq, the economic crisis, etc. Our country is in transition. Obama’s win may mean more rights for blacks, but could also mean a step in the direction toward equality for all. In my mind, gay rights activists are way ahead of where African Americans were during the days of Jim Crow Laws. There is not public physical abuse of lesbians and gays. There is no separate drinking fountains, or bus sections for the GLBT community, and two states allow gay marriage. "Equal protection under the law is the foundation of American society."(5) I believe this will be “fully” true someday. I feel like this generation, with Obama leading, will lead to civil rights gains for African Americans, Gays and Lesbians, Latinos, and all Americans. The setbacks of four states passing marriage laws are simply inevitable, and will be overshadowed by new legislation soon.
Sources:
(1) http://www.diversityinc.com/public/4739.cfm
(2) http://lesbianlife.about.com/od/lesbianactivism/p/BarackObama.htm
(3) http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-gaymarriage6-2008nov06,0,2331815.story
(4) http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=California_Proposition_8_(2008)
(5) http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=California_Proposition_8_(2008)#Theories_for_poll_movement
According to a report from the Star Tribune within minutes of winning the election, as suspected the calls from foreign leaders starting to flood in. Every foreign leader across the world had some sort of advice to offer our new President. For example, the Taliban offered Obama their words of wisdom “we urge him to pout an end to all politics being followed by his opposition party, the Republicans, and he should pull out US troops." This wasn't the only advice that poured into the hands of Obama's correspondents and the White House Staff (1).
President Bush's former Senior Advisor offered his words of wisdom to Mr. Obama. He suggests that since Obama doesn't have the strongest political record out there, that he should work to build his (2). I think this is true in many aspects. Obama has some experience in the Senate, but not much; and by winning this election he is being given the chance to prove himself even with his lack of experience. Obama has a chance to lead America in the fight for change, and he has a long road ahead of him. Obama needs to build up a positive track record by pushing policy through congress that will positively change America and bring some relief to the people (2) also suggested that Obama appoint some Republican nominees, not just his party. This will show/encourage bipartisanship, and take steps towards ending thick party lines. Bipartisanship I believe will work in Obama's favor-he will receive advice and wisdom from qualified people across the board; with clearly different views which helps keep balance in the system; not to mention different viewpoints and strategies.
The New York Times published an article about Obama's focuses, and what he should be focusing on first. Obama has made it clear that his first priority is the Economy; and that’s what America wants (3). Everyone is in need of relief in some way or another. Mr. Obama is pushing for an Economic Relief Program which would help RELIEVE America's people from the financial turmoil. Critics warn against Obama being to tempted to do to much/push for to much to relieve the economy. But with the bailout, John Tuck said in the New York Times article that "Obama’s options are limited" (3). Despite all the talk, Obama has assured the people that he will "hit the ground running" (3). Obama plans to get started right away, because much of his agenda is lengthy, and will take time. In order to relieve the economy, he might have to fix more minor problems such as education, energy and healthcare. Many believe that in addressing these issues, it will help his economy plan fall into place, and run more smoothly (3). He has an energy plan which he plans to attack quickly in office; a hybrid energy plan. I do believe it is a good idea to get a more sufficient energy plan out there, because we need to make more hybrid transitions, and start to save out natural resources. It will be a challenging and ambiguous plan, but at this point it is what I believe we need. Obama is ready to show America early off in his game that he is truly here for change. I think Obama needs to also focus on his taxation plans early in office. I think he should follow the plan to extend Bush's tax cut plan till 2010, while offering other tax breaks to families in need (3). The 16 month troop withdrawal plan I think will be put off for awhile while he tackles the economy. The war business is risky right now, and it is going to be hard to withdrawal in so little time. Obama needs to talk to foreign leaders and come up with a stronger plan of attack before withdrawing troops. Other policies Obama wants to pursue in the first year is issues with Guantanamo Gay, Immigration, Trade Rules, and the Middle East. I think immigration will be a hard one to address since Obama had enormous support for the minorities. All in all Obama has a tough year ahead of him. It will take time and patience, but he needs to show America the change they voted into office.
1. www.startribune.com/politics/34496554
2. www.newsweek.com/id/134322
3. www.nytimes.com/2008/11/09/US/politics/09promises.html
What advice do you have for Obama (who is inheriting a financial crisis and 2 wars)? What do you think he should focus on in his first 6 months and for the 1st year?
My advice for Obama would be to focus on the wars and the economy in the first year or so. He should especially work on ending the wars. They are a huge financial drain on us in a time when we really can’t afford to spend money on something that isn’t helping the economy. The Bush administration estimated the Iraq war costing the U.S. $50-60 billion when we first entered the war. Now, it costs about $12 billion for just one month. Some people even estimated the war to cost $3 trillion in March (1). By June, over $646 billion was had already been spent along with $430 million a day (2). The U.S. already has a large debt of over $10.58 trillion (3), which is nearly double the amount we were at when Bush first took office (4). If Obama ends the war, a lot of that money can be used to help our economy, which will help the economies of other countries as well. Instead of giving away money from the stimulus packages, it should be invested into creating more jobs and improving education and healthcare. Over 760,000 people (as of September) have lost their jobs. In September alone, 159,000 Americans became jobless (5). The stimulus packages will only provide temporary relief, and not much either. The U.S. needs to produce more to keep the money circulating within our economy, rather than another somewhere else. In order to keep the flowing within our economy, people need to buy domestic products. They need money to continue purchasing said products which they can’t do since some aren’t employed. In the end, I think that ending the war will greatly help the situation we’re facing, and it’ll save the lives of a lot of soldiers in the future.
Sources:
1) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/19/iraq-casualties-iraq-cos_n_92303.html
2) http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/11/news/economy/iraq_war_hearing/index.htm?cnn=yes
3) http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np
4) http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/09/29/couricandco/entry4486228.shtml
5) http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/business/economy/04jobs.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
At the moment, there is no shortage of advice directed towards Barack Obama.
A main issue during Obama’s presidency will be the economy. One tenet he should deal with with celerity is the potential auto industry bailout (1). I agree on moral grounds with Tom Friedman, who suggested rejecting the bailout because of no real plan for the industry’s recovery (1). However, I realize that a bailout plan for the auto industry is likely the best course of action for the country. In the case of a bailout, I agree with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and believe there should be a comprehensive plan for the auto makers’ use of the money (1). I think that part of the plan should be a decision to significantly improve mileage and decrease pollution, especially by offering more alternative energy automobiles. This bailout could be a chance to better cater to the 21st century’s energy and cost efficiency needs.
The next six months or so should consist of policy that needs rebuilding. People voted for Obama because of his economic policy; 64% of people said the economy should be his top priority after becoming president (2). Some of the things Obama plans on doing include a $50 million stimulus package, better foreclosure prevention, and a tax cut for middle class Americans (3). Obama needs to deliver on his promises and show that he is a capable leader who can be trusted.
After the economy, Obama needs to deal with issues such as Iraq, a national healthcare plan, and environmental protection. A recent poll shows that these are all issues a. that don’t deal with the national economy and b. matter to the American public (4). Although he has been very vocal about ending the war, his plans face logistical problems, so he should work with military advisors to develop a new strategy for withdrawal (5). Obama may run into some problems, but his presidency will bring change and new ideas to the United States.
1. http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/11/16/obama-gets-plenty-of-advice-on-detroit-bailout/
2. http://www.pollingreport.com/prioriti.htm
3. http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1812964,00.html
4. http://www.pollingreport.com/prioriti.htm
5. http://www.mlive.com/us-politics/index.ssf/2008/11/obama_iraq_plan_may_hit_road_b.html
I think Obama winning the election will mean a huge change for the US. Whether it's a good change or not has yet to be seen but it puts our country in an interesting position in the world. I think a huge reason Obama won was that he was a huge change, which is what many people wanted. Also people referred to McCain as a copy of Bush and that many of his plans came across as similar to Bush's which scared a lot of people (1). Obama also won because people are worried about the failing economy and also hold an extreme distaste of George Bush (2). Many also felt that McCain's campaign was a failure of epic proportions though to be fair the odds were going to be stacked against any republican because of Bush. The McCain campaign was horribly organized and their choice of Palin while at first energized the campaign he ended up eliminating his best argument against Obama and that was inexperience (3). McCain also should have been more positive throughout his campaign because conservatives usually succeed if they appeal to the optimism of the nation (3). Another mistake on the republican campaign was having no state strategy. They didn't put pressure on democratic states to vote for them. The way they handled the wallstreet crisis was also horrifying.
1.www.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/us/politics/17policy.html
2.http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/05/politics/main4572555.shtml
3. http://www.newsweek.com/id/167561
Obama's win of president means so much for America. It will result hopefully in some good change. I believe this will make black people stop making excuses because they are simply black. It will hopefully make the economy recover in a faster process than McCain solution. Hopefully there is a better living in experience now that Obama is President.
I think Obama won simply because he appealed to more people. The US citizens were sick of Bush's ways on government. People felt it was time for change simply. Obama offered that and McCain didn't. Obama was a bigger appeal to young people and it was the biggest turn out for younger people ever in the United States in any election all time. Obama had a better campaign which ultimately made him the election and McCain was always changing his stances on a given issue through his campaign for president.
-What does an Obama victory mean for the US? Why do you think he won?
Obama won for various different reasons. What I see as one larger reason is that Obama campaigned better than what McCain had. Many others also believe that the republicans needed to be taken out of office and that Obama will be able to sway Washington D.C. more so than recently past presidents have been able to (1). I feel as if a large portion of America is looking for some change in government and Obama provides that. I also believe that Obama will be able to work on both sides of the isle in order to bring this country back to its economic power (2)(3). But I do wonder about who his tax plan will affect “wealthy” Americans. He does in fact speak about cutting taxes, but change economically is going to take money and I do wonder where that money will actually come from.
1. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15300.html
2. http://www.efluxmedia.com/news_Obama_McCain_hold_first_meeting_since_election_29215.html
3. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-il-goodbyeobama,0,975115.story
Late but eh:
What advice do you have for Republican representatives and senators in a Democratic Congress?
If the Republicans want to get something favorable done for themselves, they will have a hard time. With the Democrats having at least 57 seats in the Senate and at least 255 of the 435 seats in the House, they can certainly take down any conservative bills. But they may not. As the book says, politicians are less tied to a party, even the Representatives, than they used to be and will stray from the party lines if their own interests guide them. Republicans may be able to get some votes that way. But it is more likely that they will have to go the route of “I scratch your back, you scratch mine.” They will have to compromise with and even legitimize some of the Democrats’ bills if they expect to get anything done. Maybe they shouldn’t expect to get anything conservative passed or block any liberal, Democrat bills. If they don’t expect to make right turns in policy, they should join the Democrats to convince their own party to give support in order to lead the nation that is currently in crisis. It may be the only way to save themselves from the chopping block next election and to have a positive legacy in the history books (2). Newt Gingrich and Governor Bobby Jindal believe that the Republicans have to look to their surviving governors to lead them, and they point to the successes that governors have had influencing change in the past (3). I agree with the fact that they need to find some strong leadership to articulate and to implement some of their policies in order to set an example for the rest of America. I think that the Republicans in this Congress will be, for the most part, immobilized. Of course, there is always the option of filibustering in the Senate. Democrats have not quite reached the 60 seats necessary for a filibuster-proof majority (something I heard about during election coverage) which would mean that they could invoke cloture every time. I really hope that Republicans don’t do that, though, because we don’t need gridlock in hard economic times and they would be voted out of office for that offense. According to the article in (2), they could always work together with Democrats to face the problems that the country faces, and that may be all they can do to foster credibility for the future. They can always sit back and wait for the Democrats to implode (eh, Alec). Nancy Pelosi was actually worried that it may happen that way and therefore encourages Obama to lead the nation along a centrist path, not becoming to liberal, so they don’t have a repeat of the 1994 elections (4).
(1) http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/
(2) http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/16/zelizer.mccain/index.html
(3) http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/11/has-been-newt-g.html
(4) http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/05/house.election/index.html
-What does it mean that MN voted for Obama and Coleman (who knows now), Paulsen, and Bachman (who are all Republicans)?
I definitely think the election results for MN were very interesting this year. Many Republican representatives were elected (possible senator?), but yet the state voted for the Democrat, Obama, for President. I think this shows how many people vote on the candidate rather than party lines. In the case of Madia vs. Paulsen - Dan Pollock offered a possible analysis -- “I think there will be a lot of different analysis here,” Pollock said. “One possible is the shift from Iraq to the economy hurt Ashwin Madia. That was tough, obviously. It helped Obama, but hurt Madia. And certainly there was an impact by the negative ads. I think he [Madia] had a lead in early October and then it started to slip away,” (2). Pollock described the different stance on the issues may have effected the votes. I think negative ad's also contributed to people not voting for certain candidates. One EP voter; Bonnie Tapper said, “At first, it was discouraging,” she said. “I just got beat up by the negative ads. It was a tough one to decide,” Tapper added. “There were good points on both sides.” (2). Tapper was not alone in these feelings. Many others also agreed with her. Each campaign spent nearly 2.5 million dollars on advertisements (2).Political science professor Paula O'Loughlin also mentioned that negative advertising was a key contributor to turning voters off [of candidates](1).
Experience seemed to be another factor that influenced voters. Mary Reed, typically a Democrat, did vote for Coleman after a hard decision (1). She believes Franken is smart, but in the end; Coleman has done a lot to help her family and has more experience which won her vote (1).
I think the negative ads, candidates issues, and experience are many factors that voters today take into consideration. This decreases voting party lines and encourages split-ticket voting; which is why I believe MN has elected candidates from both parties.
(1)http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/11/05/voters_for_obama_not_coleman/
(2)http://www.edenprairienews.com/news/elections/it-s-obama-paulsen-and-coleman-eden-prairie-6439
Post a Comment