Saturday, December 22, 2007

Democratic campaigning techniques

Obama is closing in on the gap with Clinton--the shrinkage of her 25 point lead on Obama in October to her current lead of 14 points in California could bode ill for the New York senator in this important Democratic state.

Each side has its supporters:

Clinton, with the help of endorsers such as the United Farm Workers, is hoping to appeal to the strong Democratic groups of women and Latinos as her strenths lie in change, leadership, and experience.

Clinton is planning a 7-county tour in California with the goal of meeting voters at BYOP ("Bring Your Own Phone") parties. Supporters bring their cell phones and use their free minutes on weekends and evenings to advocate Clinton to their family, friends, and undecided voters. Additionally, many volunteers are expected to come to the parties "armed with gifts for disadvantaged children," a strategy to combine the current obsession on the holidays as well as the upcoming elections.

Obama campaign has turned to the internet, including a "virtual phone bank" allowing thousands of volunteers call targeted voters from now until election day.

Both have been sending out special appeals to absentee voters (an estimated 40% of all California Democrats will mail in their ballot).

Whose campaign do you think will be the most effective? Will Obama's internet aspect give him an edge in his grassroots movement? Will Clinton manage to nab the women and Latino votes?

Visit the following website for more information from the orginal article:

Is America getting into some Trouble?

Ok, so I was checking out yahoo finance the other day and read that apparently there have been some major investments in the United States from China. Right now, China is investing in America more than America is investing in China. Good you ask? Well that all depends. If China invests in America, then they are establishing that they will not risk"problems" with America because their money is at risk. One analyst even points as far to say that it would be a good thing if Middle Eastern nations were investing in America because they would want their investments to increase in value and not want to risk not supplying oil. The problem, is that if we are not investing back though we do not have to worry about the other nations. In an ideal situation, our investments would be equal to each others, but this is not happening.

What can happen? Well if American businesses began to be bought out from other investors around the world it will make us dependent on other economies, even though we already are, it will make us even more dependent. The problem though, is that if we do not invest back what is going to happen?

Will it turn out ok, will it all end up bad, or we will just have to wait and find out?

Friday, December 21, 2007

Republicans are still searching for a candidate

With the Iowa caucus just two weeks away, the presidential race is clearly heating up. But for the first time in half of a century, no vice president or incumbent is running. As the Democratic race is continuing to tighten, the Republican race is constantly changing with no clear winner in view.
According to a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney are tied for first place with 20% (which shows Giuliani's great fall from his original 10% advantage over Romney just six weeks ago due to negative press regarding his personal life and business transactions). Mike Huckabee follows with 17%, which is not much less considering that margin of error is 3.1% and in early november he only had a single digit percentage of support. Following Huckabee is John McCain with 14% and then Fred Thompson at 11%.
However, because there is no front runner, the race is becoming more unpredictable. For example, despite Romney's higher ranking in the polls, he has fallen behind Huckabee in the Iowa nominating contest.
While this confusion may easily be a result of Bush's current low approval rating, it may also be a result of the current coalitions that are known to define the Republican party finally not being able to work together any more. While the party combining social, economical, and foreigh policy conservatives may have been able to function properly under Reagan, it is apparent that it no longer can.
This next election will no doubt be a turning point in American politics. But it may be moreso than we are expecting. There is so much interparty conflict within the Republican party that maybe a split by one of the leading coalitions could happen changing the Republican party as we know it. Although this would be a huge ordeal, it seems to be more and more possible as this election plays out.

Tuesday, December 18, 2007

Good Luck

Hey everyone hope your finals are going well and I know you can not wait for me to start bloggin huh?

Sunday, December 16, 2007

"Major Crackdown on Terrorists", or fluke?

Bush's label as this case as a "major crackdown on terrorists" has been demolished again.

Yesterday, one of 7 men accused of trying to blow up a Sears tower in Chicago was acquitted. As for the other six, the jury was deadlocked and a mistrial was declared in the prosecution of them.
These people, known as the "Liberty City Seven," often gathered in a rundown warehouse in Miami, but never attained any weapons or threatening equipment. However, officials on the other hand wanted "pre-emptive terrorism precaution." They first became under suspicion in 2005 when a man contacted the FBI to report suspicious activity (he claimed they asked him for help in contacting Al Qaeda).

Was this charge justified? Does this hurt the Bush reputation any further? What can we learn from this? What will the verdict be?

So is this the crackdown on terrorism?

Full Article:

The role of a political wife...

At 58, Ann Romney looks young, glamorous, and rich. Recently, Candidate Mitt Romney's wife has been the talk of the nation. However, this is because she seems to have shed the traditional "campaign spouse trawling for votes" and taken on a different approach.

She has never asked voters for their votes, rather going for a "just-us-girls" approach (as the NY TIMES states). Reminding me of Roosevelt's fireside chats, she tries to gain a closeness to the voters - showing off pictures of her children, sharing a heart-wrecking story about her battle against multiple sclerosis that disabled her. Not without her smooth political tactics, she also often describes a manicurist bursting into tears of gratitude because of a education program her husband introduced as governor of Massachusetts.

While she was a liability when Mr. Romney ran for Senate several years ago, the public now sees her much better at retail politics than her husband.

Do you think the spouse of the candidate assists in gaining votes? When you are looking at who to vote for, do you even consider their spouse? How much of a political role do spouse's play when the president is in the office? How much should people take this into account?

Full Article: