Tuesday, May 5, 2015
Will diversity help the Republicans?
Read this article from CNN and answer the following questions. What is the main idea of the article? Do you agree with the main idea? Why or why not? Be sure to cite the article in your response to earn credit, but also paraphrase when necessary to reflect your own understanding of the article. How does this reflect the difficulty Republicans have faced as a political party in the past? What does this article illustrate about the broader role of political parties in American politics?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
The main idea that i got from the article is that the Republican party has become more diverse and now has the upper hand for the 2016 election, according to the article "With more diversity, comes diverse attention and with diverse attention comes diverse voters, said Ron Bonjean" . I agree that they do have a better hold on diverse voters but they might not be on top. Being diverse doesn't always work in elections. There may be less difficulty than what was in the past because the Republicans can obtain a wider range of voters. This article shows that political parties demonstrate a way of life not just an idea of how the government should work. An example would be when Carson said "When I talk in black neighborhoods and the things that I talk about -- self-empowerment, and personal responsibility, family and a relationship with God -- those are seen as good things." This quote shows how a person, who just so happens to be in a political party, can explain to people how things in their life can change.
Things in the voters life can change.
A major part of Carly Fiorina’a platform is to end “identity politics”. She claims that if Hillary were to win then it would not be solely because she is a woman since both the Democratic and Republican parties have a female candidate. The main idea of the article is that the GOP may have a better chance of winning in this election because of their more diverse pool of candidates. Whether or not diversifying the pool actually helps election numbers for the GOP I believe diversifying the candidate pool will help relive American politics of stereotyping parties based on race. I think it’s distasteful that the Republican Party gets has been stereotype of the rich white man and while the Democratic Party and Obama is accused of winning only because of his race. Aside from whether the stereotypes are accurate or not it is nothing but positive that the GOP is narrowing the race and gender gap between the two parties.
In the past the Republican Party has primarily drawn white voters while the Democratic Party wins the minorities. Statistically speaking in order to win an election the Republicans would have to draw a much larger crowd of the minorities in order to win. The diversity in candidates may attract more minority groups to vote for Republican candidates.
Neither Carson nor Fiorina have “ever been elected to public office” before. This shows the prevalence of political parties over social and economic policies. Now in the GOP people with experience in fields such as medicine or corporate has equivalent power to those who have years of experience in the political arena.
1. The main idea of the article is about the diversity of the republican candidates for the 2016 election. Personally I do think that the diversity of the party candidates because of the variety of candidates means for a more the more likeliness for a republican president in the coming year. I say this because "With more diversity, comes diverse attention and with diverse attention comes diverse voters," said Ron Bonjean, a GOP strategist. "It's not going to change the world, but it's helpful. It's a chip away strategy, every percentage counts. It's not a planned out strategy, but it's one that Republicans should take advantage of.” And from this it shows the this unplanned strategy will work for the republicans run the democrats out of the polls. This reflects the past difficulty because of how limited the presidential election have been in the past 20 years with old with old white men, and politicians and now there is a large variety of candidates with minorities, non-politicians, and women, which provides for people to decide on a good candidate.
The main idea of this article is to show that diversity is occurring for the Republican presidential candidates. African-Americans and women are seen as minorities in America and typically are Democratic. The Republicans try to broaden their candidates to appeal to more voters. The article states that the "diverse rosters of candidates is the most visible acknowledgement that the GOP needs to broaden their tent", indicating the importance for diversity to win elections. I agree because America's diversity is only increasing and by providing candidates that will appeal to the minorities, the Republicans will have a better chance of winning because of their gain in voters that would typically vote for Democrats. This reflects the Republicans' difficulty by showing the results of presidential elects for the past terms, both won by Obama. One of the reasons that Obama won was because he had many minorities on his side to vote for him. The broader role of political parties in America is to represent the people. The article shows this by acknowledging the Republicans' attempt to reach out to different groups of people in order to represent the people better.
The main idea of this article is about diversity soon becoming a benefit in the republican 2016 election. I do agree that including diversity will be a benefit , by becoming more diverse you will be able to appeal to more voters. In the article it states "It's not going to change the world, but it's helpful. It's a chip away strategy, every percentage counts. It's not a planned out strategy, but it's one that Republicans should take advantage of."meaning that even though it will not change the world it will still be more helpful than the past because of the fact they can reach a wider variety of people.This article illustrates this by showing how a little change in such as diversity will get the political party so much further than before.
Many new Republican candidates are joining the race for presidency including Dr. Ben Carson and former CEO Carly Fiorina. With more diverse choices than any other election in history, voters are given the opportunity to choose what qualities they wish to see in an American leader. A benefit of such differing presidential candidates is that minority groups are encouraged to vote for a party not typically associated with variety. I agree with Ron Bonjean that diversity is not "going to change the world, but it's helpful" and that "it's one [strategy] that Republicans should take advantage of". While the party has yet to fully grasp their minority population of interest, the Republicans are taking a new approach to the election that seems hopeful. Republicans are usually seen as conservative, white Americans and this has hurt their image when campaigning by scaring away potential voters. With recent attempts to create a less "bias" seeming party, the Republicans push candidates like African-American Ben Carson or female Carly Fiorina, but little change has been witnessed in the publics' view of Republicans. Politics parties demonstrate the choice American voters have when deciding how they want their values and beliefs represented. A party makes the choice as to who is a representative of the country easier by selecting specific qualities normally associated with that party, but sometimes those parties may be attributed with the wrong values and scare voters into the opposite direction like with Republicans and their position on gay marriage.
The main idea of the article is how the GOP has a coalition of diverse candidates and how that will give them an edge in the 2016 election. As far as agreeing with the main idea, I believe that it is a possibility and that this new found diversity in the GOP presidential line-up could give them a NEW edge, but will not make too much of a difference in this upcoming election. The Republicans cannot make changes expecting immediate results, or at least significant results that make a difference. These changes made for this election should be counted as a foundation or stepping stones to a reformed GOP, not the ticket to win the election. This reflects the difficulty the Republicans have faced as a party in the past because these are the votes that the GOP lacks in and where they fall behind the Democrats in: the African-American vote, the Latino vote, and the female vote. The GOP has relied on the older, white demographic to cinch their victories for them. But, the demographics of the United States is changing and it is a shame that it has taken until the 2016 election for the GOP’s coalition to reflect that. What this article illustrated about the broader role of political parties is that no matter the ideals, the goal should be to benefit the American people. Not a small fraction of them, not even all of them, but enough for the greater good. In order to do that, you have to reach out, campaign, and advocate policies and legislation that encompasses as many demographics as possible: blacks, Latinos, Asians, LGBTs, etc.
The main idea of this article is to point out the diversity of the Republican presidential candidates and question if it will help draw in more voters. I do agree with the idea that diversity will draw in more voters. The article says that the "GOP needs to broaden their tent beyond the coalition of older, white voters, who haven't been able to deliver a national election since 2004, and only then by a slim margin." I think this is true because the voters can find a candidate they relate to, whether it's Dr. Carson, who one voter said, "He came from nothing and became something", or Fiorina who is neutralizing "any advantage Hillary Clinton's candidacy might have with women." This reflects the difficulty the Republicans have faced in the past because they can win more points from not only women, but the voters that are not older white males. This article illustrates that the broader role of political parties in American politics is that voters choose the candidate that shares their values and ideals. The political party label ultimately doesn't matter if their party's candidate doesn't want the same things the voter wants.
Personally I think that the main idea of the article was that eventually the the Republican party is going to become more diverse and as a result they may potentially be better off in the upcoming 2016 election because of there diversity. One quote that stood out to me from the article was what Rob Boniean has stated which was, “With more diversity, comes diverse attention and with diverse attention comes diverse voters.” I strongly agree with Boniean quote that he had said because with a more diverse crowd you will get more diverse votes meaning that people from different races and cultures may vote for you which is especially good rather than just focusing on one race and culture and trying to receive votes from only that culture or race. This ultimately allows for a wider range of voters. Personally I think that one role of a political party in the United States is to represent Americans. I feel as though this article illustrated that concept because the Republicans had actually made an attempt to reach out and get votes from other cultures and races (an attempt to be more diverse) which ultimately will allow for them to represent Americans better.
The main idea of this article is to show the increase of diversity in the republican party, and how that diversity will become beneficial to the republicans in the upcoming election. I do agree with the article, diversity amongst the party will attract more votes in the long run, because the republicans will appeal to a larger range of voters as Bonjean said, "With more diversity, comes diverse attention"
This reflects the difficulty republicans have faced in the past, because it now widens their range of supporters and voters. This article illustrates that, by showing the republicans attempts and interests in appealing to a more diverse group of voters.
The main idea of this article is that the Republican Party is now more diverse, having in the field two latinos, an African - American, and a woman. The reason for having this diversity is to beat the all white democratic runner ups. Having the diversity is important because the Republicans are trying to make inroads for the minorities. I agree with this main idea because as a minority, I would be more pulled to the minority candidates because I feel like they understand the struggle of being a minority compared to a white man.
With more diversity, comes diverse attention and with diverse attention comes diverse voters," said Ron Bojean, a GOP strategist. "It's a chip away strategy, every percentage counts. It's not a planned out strategy, but it's one that Republicans should take care of."
This quote describes that having a diverse party allows the minorities to be compelled to listen since America is a melting pot of different races. As earlier mentioned, being a minority, I would be compelled to vote for the minority candidates.
In the past, the Republicans would win the white male voters by 8 points while the Democrats won the women votes by 12 points because they were more diverse. In order for the Republicans to win, they would have to draw more attention, and even though this is not the best strategy (as stated earlier in the quote), it can be useful and should be taken advantage of immediately.
The article illustrates the broader role of political parties in American Politics by using Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina. Neither have been elected before, but this shows that being a doctor (Ben Carson) or working in a corporation (Fiorina) is the same as having the experience as a politic area.
The main idea of this article is that the Republican Party is now more diverse, having in the field two latinos, an African - American, and a woman. The reason for having this diversity is to beat the all white democratic runner ups. Having the diversity is important because the Republicans are trying to make inroads for the minorities. I agree with this main idea because as a minority, I would be more pulled to the minority candidates because I feel like they understand the struggle of being a minority compared to a white man.
With more diversity, comes diverse attention and with diverse attention comes diverse voters," said Ron Bojean, a GOP strategist. "It's a chip away strategy, every percentage counts. It's not a planned out strategy, but it's one that Republicans should take care of."
This quote describes that having a diverse party allows the minorities to be compelled to listen since America is a melting pot of different races. As earlier mentioned, being a minority, I would be compelled to vote for the minority candidates.
In the past, the Republicans would win the white male voters by 8 points while the Democrats won the women votes by 12 points because they were more diverse. In order for the Republicans to win, they would have to draw more attention, and even though this is not the best strategy (as stated earlier in the quote), it can be useful and should be taken advantage of immediately.
The article illustrates the broader role of political parties in American Politics by using Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina. Neither have been elected before, but this shows that being a doctor (Ben Carson) or working in a corporation (Fiorina) is the same as having the experience as a politic area.
This CNN article essentially discusses the newfound diversity in the Republican party's lineup for this election "season/race" and how it could bring about a change in the demographics of the people who might vote for them. I do think that diversity is very important in politics because the more diverse a government is, the better it can represent the people it governs (although the comment that "Jeb Bush, whose wife is a Latina, claims status as an 'honorary Latino'" kind of irks me). I think that the Republican party has very much alienated a lot of younger voters, especially women and minorities, because to be honest almost all of their more notable previous candidates have been white males over the age of 40; it's difficult to see someone's point of view on policies that directly affect you if the policy doesn't affect the person making it (for example, during the last presidential "campaign season" there were quite a few very opinionated men discussing abortion and birth control).
The gist of this article is to point out that the political parties are changing racially and they cannot really pinpoint if the candidates are doing it for publicity or if the idea of a predominately black Democratic Party and predominately white Republican Party is actually changing. I think they are just bringing to the readers attention the immense amount of diversity coming to political campaigns. I do agree that diversity is a game changer and that it can definitely shift the amount of voters in each party. I believe that it will also give a broader spectrum of voters to both democrats and republicans. Not that everyone votes based upon race, but some do. Adding different ethnicities to the democratic and republican parties will most likely shift the statistics of race among each party. They even said "Carson can change the dynamics even with his compelling biography and hero status among some African-Americans." This shows how some can lean towards race if the connection between the voter and the candidate is there. In the article it said "...The diverse roster of candidates is the most visible acknowledgment that the GOP needs to broaden their tent beyond the coalition of older, white voters, who haven't been able to deliver a national election since 2004, and only then by a slim margin." This kind of points out the struggle the republicans have had in the past with putting out an effective presidential campaign by putting the same people out there to run. The idea of more diversity is saying that it could change the outcome of the political race. It exemplifies the control each party and different diversities have on the voter turn out. The voter turn out effects who wins. Whoever wins rules the country and that is American politics.
The main idea of this article is that the Republican party has become bigger and has grown more diverse over time. According to the article, "the biggest question is whether a diverse slate of candidates will actually help the GOP overcome its demographic problem, which has contributed to losses at the presidential level in two successive elections." I agree with the main idea because a more diverse voting crew will mean bigger ideas to think upon and a wider range of people who will vote, but this may also cause problems because people might not come to a fair conclusion which will make some people upset. This will be difficult because while they are making one group of people happy, they are making others upset which means they will get less votes. The most important thing now is getting an end to "identity politics" so more people can think for themselves.
The main idea of this article is the diversity that the Republican Party has. They Have broadened their race in their presidential candidates.
“With more diversity, comes diverse attention and with diverse attention comes diverse voters.” I really agree and like the main goal because the more diversity the different things that will be done for all races and not only that but also so many more people will actually come out to vote.
The Democrats have always had more diversity and it really has helped them. By having a diverse campaigning list they will be able to get votes of all different races to vote.
The political party label does not matter if the voter does not agree with what the campaigner wants. the broader role is for the people to realize which value do they support.
The articles main focuse is that the Republican party is finally welcoming diversity and how intense the 2016 elections are going to be. I agree that "With more diversity, comes diverse attention and with diverse attention comes diverse voters," it`s striking a major change and it` opening up the votes , cacthing the minoritys eye and it`s widening the chance for the Republican party to win the 2016 elctions. This is a major game changer for the Republican party who are known for having white males running for office and now for the 2016 election they have two Latinos, an African-American and a woman . For the last few decades the Republucan party has been closeminded and unappealing to most citzens from there lack of diversity to thier hissy fits towards Obama while the "Democrats pushed their advantage among African-Americans and Latinos to record highs" gaining the majortiy of the minority voets the Democrats had reign for 8 years with Obama.
Post a Comment