Currently the Senate Democrats are distancing themselves from Presdient Obama because of his dropping approval ratings. Associating with the President at this point can be a dangerous proposition for incumbent Democratic Senators in contentious, competitive races. with the election only a month away, will this strategy work for the Democrats? Read this HuffPost article outlining the strategy. A similar dynamic is currently building up in the Republican party as the campaign season for the 2016 Presidential election is going to start in the next six months. In anticipation of the upcoming push for the Republican Presidential nod, two prominent Republicans are showing where they stand on policy issues. Chris Christie is a moderate Republican Governor in New Jersey, a state with a Democratic legislature, so he must consistently compromise to maintain his image as a "straight-talk, get the job done" kind of Governor. Rand Paul, son of Libertarian legend Ron Paul, is a dedicated advocate of free market solutions and doesn't mind holding his ground and having an 'agree to disagree' attitude about certain policies. They are both Republicans and have been in a war of words over the last year because of their different attitudes about the future of the party and the best way to increase the base of the party to maximize their possibilities of Presidential success in 2016. Read this article from CNN about the two Republican hopefuls an answer the following questions about both articles.
1. Both of these articles indicate rifts within each party (illustrated by Paul v. Christie and Senate Dems v. Obama). Which of these rifts do you think will have a bigger impact? The Republican rift and their chances for winning nationally in 2016 or the Democrats and their chances for keeping the Senate in 2014? Why?
2. Do
you think the Senate Dems will be successful in 2014 or not? Will their strategy
work? Why or why not?
3. Do
you think the Republicans will be successful in 2016 or not? Will their
strategy work? Why or why not?
4. Is
it a good thing that Paul and Christie, “sound a lot alike” as they say in the
article? Would you vote for someone you
did not agree with all of the time? What
are the possible ways this could play out in the 2016 Republican primary? Explain.
5. Is
it a good thing that the Democrats are distancing themselves from Obama? Is this simply political posturing to
maximize reelection chances or do you think these Democrats are genuinely in
disagreement with the President?
Explain.
6. Is
there any bias evident in either article?
Cite and explain.
15 comments:
1. Democrats vs. Obama, because it shows that the Democrats are against their own party which might leave a bad impression on voters. Obama is the figurehead of the Democratic party, so it looks bad for them.
2. Perhaps not, because they seem contradictory as they are distancing themselves from their own party. People are going to associate Democrats with Obama no matter what.
3. They have a fair chance, especially if they make their campaign more overreaching by coming more to the middle. This will attract the independent votes, although they might lose some conservative votes.
4. It is good in a way because if they both run and one wins, all voters can move over easily, but it may create a rift in the party resulting in a long primary.
5. I think it is political posturing since Obama's approval rating is very low. I don't think it is good because it puts the Democratic party in a negative light.
6. I don't see any very obvious bias
1. I think the Republican Rift will have a bigger impact. The Democrats still basically maintain similar beliefs, they just don't agree with the way they're being enforced and implemented. Where as, the Republicans are splitting based on their beliefs. Some republicans are moving more towards the center, ad this is causing a split between them and the extremely conservative republicans which may possibly lead to a third party split off.
2. I think the Democrats may be successful in their strategy because they're trying to be known for their idea and views, instead of just being under the shadow of Obama.
3.I think the success of the Republican party depends on their candidate and where his/her views fall on the political spectrum. If the candidate is not a good balance, their may end up being a lack of voters or a third party split off.
4.It may actually end up being a good thing that Paul and Christy sound a lot alike because this may help mend the rift in the Republican party. I would vote for someone that I didn't agree with on everything as long as I agreed with them on the major issues that I felt were the most important.
5. I think it's a good thing that Democrats are distancing themselves from Obama because it may help them be known for their views as a whole, not just the views of Obama. I do think it's being done primarily for election purposes though. By distancing themselves from Obama, but maintaining their democratic beliefs those who don't like obama may still vote democrat.
6. I found no noticeable bias in these articles
1. The Republican rift will have the biggest impact in which party wins the national election in 2016 because the Republican party is going through the biggest change in their party image. Some Republican candidates are becoming more libertarian like Ron Paul, and other conservatives are just becoming more liberal on their stance of abortion, marijuana, and same-sex marriage. This could attract independents and, depending on who the Republican nominee for president is, help them win the election.
2. Senate Democrats will be successful in 2014 because the Democratic policies are very trendy and supported by most of the American population. Regardless of Obama's approval rating, most people agree with Democrats on marijuana, abortion, and LGBT rights. Having Democratic senators distinguish themselves from Obama could help them attract some conservative independents, and the democratic strategy of using social media to get young voters to the polls will continue to work.
3. It all depends on who the Republican candidate is in 2016, in regards to if the Republicans will be victorious in the 2016 election. The Republican party should adjust its strategies though, by using social media more, really campaigning in liberal urban areas, becoming more liberal on some things, and be willing to compromise some ideals within the party.
4. This is a good thing because it shows Paul and Christie says Paul and Christie have differences but are still Republicans. I would vote for someone I didn't agree with all of the time because you're not going to find a nominee that you agree with on everything. The guy that has the more central political ideology will be the one to win the 2016 Republican primary.
5. Some of the candidates could disagree with Obama but mostly I think Democrats who are distancing themselves from Obama are mostly doing it to maximize their chances of winning in the polls. At the end of the day, the Democratic candidates are still Democrats and will always be associated with Obama because Obama is the main representative of the Democratic party. I think most of the Democrats agree with Obama on most issues and are just putting space in between themselves and Obama to attract independent voters.
6. The article has some bias by painting an image of the Democratic candidates as betraying Obama with "Some Democratic candidates for Senate seem hellbent on creating distance from their standard-bearer, either by avoiding him on the campaign trail or publicly denouncing his legislation..."
1.) Dems v. Obama because if Democrats do not advocate issues under their alleged political party, then what does that say about the party itself? What does that say about the person, in this case Obama, representing the party?
2.) Maybe the senate dems won't be successful due to the differing they are going through now in their party. If they can come to a point of unity, then perhaps their chances of being successful will increase.
3.) The republicans have a chance if they come to a point of unity, just like the senate dems need a point of unity. Their strategy may work because at least they think the same things just slightly different depending on the possible candidate.
4.) Yes it is a good thing because that means at the end of the day everyone is on the same page for the most part. Yes I would vote for someone that may have a few opposing topic matters because this allows for diversity, and different opinions to be considered.
5.) It's not good because that gives a negative connotation to the party and it's leader. I believe this is truly a disagreement because dems are most likely ready for change. They feel as though what Obama said he would do, or wouldn't do, he isn't doing or is.
6.) I do not see any signs of bias.
1. I believe the democrats vs. Obama will have a bigger impact because its a larger party and all the problems that go on within the democratic party involve the people which could result poorly for democrats. Between the winning, republicans will have a larger impact because its a new implementation of policies.
2. It wont be successful because its like two of the same parties going against one another which then gives the implication of an unstable democratic party.
3. Possibly if they stick to their strategy and make it convincing that they will appeal to both parties but they must come to a compromising agreement.
4. I think its bad because it implies theyre not bringing anything new to the table if all strategies are the same. It can be good as well because it shows the people the stability in republican policy and shows that they know what theyre doing. I would vote for someone i didnt agree with because as long as i agree with the basic terms of the candidate, there will always be times where disagreement will occur.
5. I don't think its good democrats are distancing from Obama because it starts to divide the party and makes it unstable
6. There was no bias
(1B)
(1) The Republican rift will have the biggest impact in which party wins the national election
because the republicans are trying to gain more votes by moderating their issues. A lot of Republican candidates are leaning more libertarian, and numerous conservatives are becoming more liberal on ideas and issues like same-sex marriage. This could gain more of the independent vote helping with either election.
(2) Senate Democrats will mostly be successful in 2014 because the Democratic policies are already most focused on and the main issues right now. Even though Obama's approval rate may not be the highest right now, most people agree with Democrats. Democratic senators who part themselves from Obama could help attract independents, and still gain youth votes.
(3) Might be successful in 2016. The Republican party is changing its strategies though, by using social media, and really campaigning towards all political groups, and becoming more liberal on some things.
(4) This is ok, it shows Paul and Christie says Paul and Christie have differences, but are both republicans. But wouldn’t vote for someone I didn't agree with all of the time because I would want to be sure about them. The candidate that has the more liberal/central ideology will most likely win.
(5) Democratic senators who part themselves from Obama could help attract independents, and still gain youth votes and are doing it to gain chances of winning in the polls. I think most of the Democrats agree with Obama on his choices and just want to gain votes from the independents.
(6) I don’t think bias was an issue in the article.
1) I think the Republican rift will have the biggest impact. They are easier to shift and break apart and they just drift based on their separate ideas.
2) I think they will be successful because they mostly control the house and they will drift away from being with Obama and they will be more with fixing their ideas.
3) I don't think they will be successful in the 2016 election because they haven't got a set candidate and they haven't expressed their views enough or their ideas.
4) Having them sound alike will help them because people can see their ideas aren't flip flopping and see they have one main idea and focus.
5) I think this is a positive thing because it shows that they want to help everyone and the president is the only democrat there and they have more focuses. People can vote for Democrats and the people it has as a whole instead of worrying about what the president is doing.
6) I see no bias in either article.
1. I think the Republican Rift will have a bigger impact because the Republicans are leading towards a more positive way while the democrats are more deviating. The Republicans also are easier to break apart.
2. I think the Democrats won't be successful because they don't approve of Obama and the two parties would be going against each other.
3.I think the Republicans will be successful because they use good strategies and if they make sure it calls for both parties.
4. It is a good thing because if they are alike there won't be much different ideas so they will be on the same page.
5. I don't think it's a good thing because you wouldn't want to vote for someone who has already messed up.
6. I don't see any bias.
1. I believe that the Senator Democrats vs. Obama has a bigger impact because it shows how the democrats cannot work together with their party leader. They are constantly disagreeing with each other and are making not trying to come and work together.
2. No, because the public opinion does not favor Obama and he is not coming across as a favorable leader for the Democratic Party.
3. I think that the Republicans can be successful in the 2016 elections if they move to the middle and get the independent votes. However, the republicans also need to be considerate and not lose a lot of votes from the conservative’s republicans.
4. It’s ok for both Christie and Paul to sound alike because if one wins, a majority of the voters can just move over to the elected candidate because their values are similar to values of the candidate that lost. I would vote for someone I fully didn’t agree with, as long as their values are not excessive and go against my beliefs.
5. I think that it good for the democrats to somewhat distance themselves from Obama, because it allows them to gather what is important as a whole and not fall under the negative public views associated with Obama.
6. I didn’t find any bias when reading the article.
1. The Republican Riff is different than the Democratic Rift. The Republican Rift appears to me that they are splitting their beliefs, some Republicans are extremely conservative and then there are other Republicans who are still conservative but are moving more towards the center, perhaps trying to win the independent vote. Where as, the Republican Rift is simply trying to get away from being criticized just like Obama is being criticized currently. The Democrats still have the same beliefs, they all remain mostly liberal. In which I believe that the Republican Rift will have a bigger impact since it appears that their party is splitting into more conservative and center.
2. I don't believe so, I feel like citizens will still identify the Democrats with Obama and Republicans will take advantage of that.
3. There is a fair chance that the Republicans strategy may work, simply for the fact that if they move more towards the center they are more inclined to get more independents to vote for them.
4. It is good that they are similar, meaning that they have similar views since they are from the same party. However, I will not vote for someone that I do not agree with at the time, if I do not have the same views as you there will be no point in voting, regardless if they are the candidate from my chosen party.
5. I believe that it is good that the Democrats are distancing themselves from Obama, simply to become more popular and get a better image for their party.
6. I think that these articles are pretty reasonable, with no bias, they don't go left or right.
(1B) The Democrats and their chances for keeping the Senatein 2014 will have a bigger impact. I strongly believe that the Democrats are moving away from Obama's ideas. They don't want for Obama to ruin their chances of winning again because he's not exactly favored by the American people right now. His approval rating is at 38% which shows how much the American people dislike him. His low approval rating shows how people just don't like Obama himself. The Senate Dems probably won't be successuful because of Obama not being favored right now and the Republicans are looking good anyways. The Senate hasn't done anything lately and the people are going to want to change. I think that the Republicans will be successful in 2016 because they're actually changing their policies. Their new stance on social issues and attention to minorites will attract Independents. It is because this makes it less stressful for Republicans when they choose who they vote for (Rand or Christie). It's good for the Republicans mainly. I would because because it's impossible to find someone who you can agree with 100% of the time with (besides yourself). This could make the 2016 primary a lot more intense since people will be torn on who to go for and since it's such a huge decision. It is a good thing and it is simply political posturing to maximize reelection chances because the Democrats need to do whatever they can to win the reelection and Obama is not giving them a good look right now so they need to distance themselves. I didn't recognize any bias in either article.
1. I think that the Republican rift will have the larger impact because the republicans are attempting to gain more votes by altering some of their views.Many Republicans are adapting to a more libertarian viewpoint , while a large number of conservatives are seemingly becoming more liberal ideas pertaining to issues such as samisen marriage.
2. I think that the democrats will be successful in 2014 in their strategy to win. Regardless of President Obama's low ratings, many people agree on issues that the Democratic party advocate.
3. It's my belief that the Republican party's success depends on the candidate, and the viewpoints in which he/she possess. If the candidate ends up not being a good choice, there will be a lack of voter turn out of for that person.
4. It is a good thing that they sound a lot alike. After all, they both belong to the same party, so they should have similar ideas. I would vote for someone that i didn't always agree with, because the fact of the matter is that we'll never 100% agree with every idea someone has.
5. I believe that political posturing since President Obama approval, is very low. It's definitely not a good thing, because it portrays the democratic party in a negative way.
6. I did not find noticeable bias.
1. Democrats vs Obama would have a bigger impact because it is a larger party and all of the problems they have will affect more people as a whole. It also shows that the Democrats cannot agree with each other, highlighting even larger problems.
2. The Senate Democrats will not be successful in 2016, because regardless people will associate the democratic party to president Obama.
3. The republicans could possibly be successful in 2016 if they keep a stable strategy. Also becoming more liberal on social issues could work in their favor as well.
4. It could be good because it shows that they both have similar stable views, but it could also possibly be bad because nobody is really bringing anything new, to interest a wider variety of people.
5. I believe that it is good that the Democrats are distancing themselves from Obama, because it gives Democrats the chance to publicize their views without being negatively associated to Obama.
6. I did not see any bias while reading the article.
1. I think the Democratic rift will be more impactful. This is in part due to the Democratic party division, but also due to the strong Republican challenges for those Senate seats. The image of Obama’s unpopular policies will be a bit too hard for the Democrats to shake.
2. I don’t think the Senate Democrats will be successful in their strategy. It is a good theoretical move to make, but the bad taste of Obama’s disapproval will still be with voters, and probably cost the Democrats some votes. Also, the percentage of Democrats who still support Obama will be alienated.
3. The Republicans seem poised to experience success in 2016, but not principally because of their policies. I think the failure of the Democrats will have a large effect on the presidential race as well.
4. Paul and Christie’s similarities seem to hint towards an interesting 2016 Republican primary. It seems that the winner will essentially represent both candidates as the Republicans try to expand their voter base.
5. I believe that there is some genuine disagreement with President Obama’s policies and choices among the Democrats, but generally speaking, the majority of politicians are distancing themselves from Obama’s failure and lack of public support. Undoubtedly, getting [re]elected is more important to the majority of these politicians than ideological compromise.
6. The HuffPost article seems to be relatively unbiased, as it includes a variety of viewpoints. For example, there is reference to “top Democratic strategist” and to “those don't think proximity or distance from Obama will matter much at all”. The CNN article seems a bit biased against Republicans, with subtle jabs included in the article’s rhetoric (“the loudest GOP advocates” makes keen use of the word “loudest”.)
Post a Comment