The general election part of the campaign communication process has been a total disaster so far. Both candidates should be legitimizing the political system and meeting campaign expectations. Instead, what we have been getting is one personal attack after another one.
As I was trying to figure out what I was going to write about, I went to different websites to see what is making the news. All I could find were articles on how Obama is talking about McCain’s dishonest campaign, about how Republicans are taking political lying to the next level, and how both candidates do nothing but talk about insignificant lipstick references and offensive ads.
It is true that we all expect Republicans to talk negatively about Democrats, and vice versa. But this time the negativity has become the focus of the campaign itself. The attacks going back and forth do nothing in terms of informing the public and legitimizing the political system. I think more and more people are getting tired of the stupid and offensive comments and ads making the news, and are starting to not even follow the campaign anymore.
I personally do enjoy some dirty politics; basically because I feel like it draws people in and engages them in the process. Plus, let’s face it, it’s kind of funny. But when dirty politics become the main focus of the elections, all they do is make you what to stay away from politics and ultimately make an uninformed decision (if you even chose to vote, of course).
Both candidates need to stop talking about each other and start talking about us, the people they are supposed to be serving if elected. I do not care to read about what the other candidate is doing wrong. I want to know what you (Obama or McCain) are going to do to improve this country. I want to be able to write about real issues on my next blog, and not about crap that does not matter at the end of the day. Electing a new president should give us some hope about what the future is going to look like. But if it is anything like what we have been seeing lately, it’s not looking too bright.
By the way, the only news related to politics I found worth watching in the last few days was the SNL Tina Fey impression of Palin. How sad is that?
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Monday, September 15, 2008
The rest of the world wants to vote, too.
American Politics. It's synonymous with apple pie, the Star-Spangled Banner, baseball, Big Macs, silicone...and baguettes?
This election cycle has of course been spotlighted in the U.S., but it has impacted the international community as well. Expatriates and internationals alike have showcased a special interest not only in American politics, but more specifically, in Barack Obama.
During time spent abroad in Western Europe, many people approached me, wanting to know who exactly I backed for the 2008 election. "I would be so proud to know you, an American, who voted for Barack Obama," my French host mother told me. A German friend confessed, "Whether you realize it or not, your president is going to change my life, too."
Clearly, Barack Obama's image as "representing a little bit of all of us" holds true on a global scale.
"'The World Wants Obama Coalition'" of international and U.S. expatriate supporters has turned into a booming marketplace of campaign-related outreach -- mostly involving people who are not eleigible to vote in the United States but who are transfixed by the Obama candidacy. "Senator Obama looks different, he sounds different, and millions of non-Americans believe he will act differently," reads the coalition's manifesto. "We cannot vote in the 2008 U.S. election, but if we could, we'd back Obama."
As some Mariachi bands say-sing, "Viva Obama."
This election cycle has of course been spotlighted in the U.S., but it has impacted the international community as well. Expatriates and internationals alike have showcased a special interest not only in American politics, but more specifically, in Barack Obama.
During time spent abroad in Western Europe, many people approached me, wanting to know who exactly I backed for the 2008 election. "I would be so proud to know you, an American, who voted for Barack Obama," my French host mother told me. A German friend confessed, "Whether you realize it or not, your president is going to change my life, too."
Clearly, Barack Obama's image as "representing a little bit of all of us" holds true on a global scale.
"'The World Wants Obama Coalition'" of international and U.S. expatriate supporters has turned into a booming marketplace of campaign-related outreach -- mostly involving people who are not eleigible to vote in the United States but who are transfixed by the Obama candidacy. "Senator Obama looks different, he sounds different, and millions of non-Americans believe he will act differently," reads the coalition's manifesto. "We cannot vote in the 2008 U.S. election, but if we could, we'd back Obama."
As some Mariachi bands say-sing, "Viva Obama."
Obama's Outreach
As I was sitting and looking through both McCain's expenditures as well as Obama's, it came clear to me that for Obama raising the most money through fundraising, he was equally burning it all up. What shocked me as well, was where Obama was raising the money from. Compared to McCain, Obama has a larger outreach to the women rather than the men. Really this is at all not a shock to me. Obama stands for someone other than a Caucasian, Upper Class Male. He stands for hope for women. Even though he isn't female himself, he is clearly a better candidate than Hilary (No offense to those that like her). But as far as percentages go, Obama has equality through the genders. Males for him are at approximately 42% and females are at 58%. Whereas McCain, sweeps the board with male conquering at a large 72% with females just being 28%. Not only does Obama reach towards the women voters, but he also reaches out towards all the minorities. This gives him the upper hand clearly, and I think in the end this will help him win the election.
But as I was looking through other financial information. I noticed something interesting. Obama obtains more of his money from the smaller contributors rather than the large ones. Instead of going for those of power, like a white, male candidate would right off the bat. He is going for those that are in a way, forgotten. Those people that may feel like they are being left out because they might not be able to contribute much, so they would usually be overlooked. Obama is smart. His outreach group is larger in turn, because we all know that now days with our standard of living, the poor overpopulate the rich, and well to do. With this idea Obama is gaining all the votes of the people that like to be heard and are glad that for once they are being noticed. He is strategising quite well and using it to his advantage. And I believe this is the reason that he is having a large success with fundraising.
But as I was looking through other financial information. I noticed something interesting. Obama obtains more of his money from the smaller contributors rather than the large ones. Instead of going for those of power, like a white, male candidate would right off the bat. He is going for those that are in a way, forgotten. Those people that may feel like they are being left out because they might not be able to contribute much, so they would usually be overlooked. Obama is smart. His outreach group is larger in turn, because we all know that now days with our standard of living, the poor overpopulate the rich, and well to do. With this idea Obama is gaining all the votes of the people that like to be heard and are glad that for once they are being noticed. He is strategising quite well and using it to his advantage. And I believe this is the reason that he is having a large success with fundraising.
Role of Comedy in the Election Process
As the person before me has mentioned, the Tina Fey impersonation of Sara Palin is absolutely hilarious (if you've ever heard either of them speak before). After watching the clip and wiping the tears of laughter from my eyes, I got to wondering about the role of comedy in the election process. To what extent does making the public laugh (hopefully not at you) help swing their vote in your favor?
For example, both Obama and McCain were guests on the Ellen Degeneres Show in the past year. When McCain came out, he had a simple smile and a wave for the audience. However, Obama came out dancing and lef the crowd laughing and cheering hysterically (possibly at the idea that a presidential candidate was willing to dance by himself on national TV). Which favored the candidates more - McCain's serious "let's get the job done" attitude or Obama's "who gives a crap, I'm gonna dance because I like this song" attitude? Is being able to laugh at a candidate more or as important as understanding their outlook on life and our country?
When the shows were shot, the election process was in the middle of the Primaries (look, a reference to class material), in which it was more important to get to know the candidate, rather than all their positions. In the context of when the shows were taped and aired, I feel as though they favored Obama much more than McCain. A sense of comfort is needed early on for candidate identification. However, now that most Americans know the candidates, and if those programs were aired today, I feel as though Obama would get lesser end of the bargain. Many people would look at him and call him a jokester, and McCain the more serious-natured man (or woman) who is ready to be president of our country.
My question for all of you who spent the time to read this post is, which matters to you more - being able to laugh and identify with your candidate or get the impression of "get the job done"?
Youtube of Obama: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsWpvkLCvu4
Youtube of McCain: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRw0zyGg1nE
For example, both Obama and McCain were guests on the Ellen Degeneres Show in the past year. When McCain came out, he had a simple smile and a wave for the audience. However, Obama came out dancing and lef the crowd laughing and cheering hysterically (possibly at the idea that a presidential candidate was willing to dance by himself on national TV). Which favored the candidates more - McCain's serious "let's get the job done" attitude or Obama's "who gives a crap, I'm gonna dance because I like this song" attitude? Is being able to laugh at a candidate more or as important as understanding their outlook on life and our country?
When the shows were shot, the election process was in the middle of the Primaries (look, a reference to class material), in which it was more important to get to know the candidate, rather than all their positions. In the context of when the shows were taped and aired, I feel as though they favored Obama much more than McCain. A sense of comfort is needed early on for candidate identification. However, now that most Americans know the candidates, and if those programs were aired today, I feel as though Obama would get lesser end of the bargain. Many people would look at him and call him a jokester, and McCain the more serious-natured man (or woman) who is ready to be president of our country.
My question for all of you who spent the time to read this post is, which matters to you more - being able to laugh and identify with your candidate or get the impression of "get the job done"?
Youtube of Obama: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsWpvkLCvu4
Youtube of McCain: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRw0zyGg1nE
McCain Creeps Up in the Poles
Senator John McCain has been slowly going up in the polls after having floundered terribly for several weeks. It would seem that by strongly staking out a pro Iraq War stance, McCain has gained a few points in the polls as well as gaining some of his favor with the public back. According to the AP, McCain has made several appearances with veteran's groups and has also campaigned with a banner that states "Never surrender."
I don't believe that McCain would just give up on the war in Iraq if put in office. But it bothers me that a man attempting to go into this position "Commander and Chief" wouldn't have enthusiasm for why our troops are over there. If I were over there, I would like to have some reasurrance to what I'm doing is the right thing.
I don't believe that McCain would just give up on the war in Iraq if put in office. But it bothers me that a man attempting to go into this position "Commander and Chief" wouldn't have enthusiasm for why our troops are over there. If I were over there, I would like to have some reasurrance to what I'm doing is the right thing.
Gender Issues in the Campaign
I honestly dont follow the election, and that makes me nervous doing this because I am not sure that I know what I am talking about in all honesty. Although, I was given a suggestion on what to blog about, and that being simply how gender is playing a role in the election this year. From what I have pieced together, by listening to people talk about the election, it almost seems as though Palin gets treated differently because she is a woman. For example, people are not allowed to ask her questions about family issues, mainly her daughter, but there are certain things that may not be brought up to her. What exactly does gender have to do with that? I have always heard people say that "If you want to be in politics, you have to make sure your business can be put in the open," shouldnt that mean that no matter the circumstances, Palin's should be allowed to be touched?
Another thing about gender that was put into perspective today was talk of whether or not McCain would have actually picked Palin to be VP, if in fact Obama would have picked Hilary Clinton. I just thought it was a good thought, but me not knowing that much, I really don't have a view on that!
Another thing about gender that was put into perspective today was talk of whether or not McCain would have actually picked Palin to be VP, if in fact Obama would have picked Hilary Clinton. I just thought it was a good thought, but me not knowing that much, I really don't have a view on that!
Obama Cancels Saturday Night Live Appearance
As Hurricane Ike hammered the Texas coast Friday night, Senator Barack Obama announced he would not appear on the season premiere of "Saturday Night Live". The Obama campaign released the following statement: In light of the unfolding crisis in Texas, Senator Obama has decided it is no longer appropriate to appear on “Saturday Night Live” tomorrow evening.
I do believe that he did this with every intention of being the right thing, but as of right now he is still and senator and doesn't have to make these decisions. He's acting as if he is already the president. But after going through this I still don't see anything wrong with it. Some people took this a little different then others.
I do believe that he did this with every intention of being the right thing, but as of right now he is still and senator and doesn't have to make these decisions. He's acting as if he is already the president. But after going through this I still don't see anything wrong with it. Some people took this a little different then others.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
