Tuesday, March 31, 2009
President Gives a Short Lifeline to Carmakers
Given the topic this week, and talking about electoral mandates, I found this article to be quite appropriate. Americans are sick of hearing news about companies using federal bailout money to pay bonuses and give vacations to their employees. In this article Obama is giving almost an ultimatum to GM and Chrysler. Voters elected Obama to bring change to Washington D.C. and solve the economic issues being faced by our country. In my opinion, he is issuing this demand to these carmakers in response to his electoral mandate. The citizens want action!
Obama's Electoral Mandate??
It would be nice to think that all our presidents had an electoral mandate. It makes perfect sense. The leader of the country would be elected by a majority of the population, and all the voters who voted for him should strongly support his policies and character. It is hard to exactly say whether or not a particular office holder has an electoral mandate because it’s all perception, but I will do my best to work through the question if Obama had (or has) an electoral mandate.
When looking at election results from 2008 on cnn.com (Election Center 2008), several things suggest that Obama had an electoral mandate. First, he won 53% of the popular vote. The majority of citizens voted for him, his character, and his policies. Secondly, Obama also won the Electoral College. He only needed 270 votes to win, yet gained 365. I find this important because he clearly exceeded the requirement to become elected. The Electoral College itself is important to his electoral mandate because a situation similar to the 2000 election didn’t occur. In that election, the popular vote winner did not receive the majority of the electoral votes, which I would argue, decreased the Electoral College winner’s (the President Elect’s) electoral mandate. Thirdly, I would imagine many voters were fed up with the Republican Party and their handling of the White House with George W. Bush. Obama’s appeal to many citizens was his slogan, “Change We Can Believe In”. He gave large numbers of American voters hope and belief for the future. He offered up change for Washington D.C. and placed a lot of emphasis on bipartisanship. In my opinion, this is what “sealed the deal” for voters to vote for Democratic Presidential Nominee, Barack Obama, giving him an electoral mandate.
I also believe President Barack Obama still enjoys this electoral mandate into his presidency. It is a little more difficult for me to interpret his mandate now because we are still in the Honeymoon Period of his presidency (the first 100 days). His approval rating will still be relatively high during this time frame because he has just taken office and is getting into the “swing of things”, and the media tends to be a bit more favorable as well during this time. Obama does seem to be delivering on some of his promises made during the campaign, such as bipartisanship and change to Washington D.C. as mentioned above. And, I think a lot of citizens see this in his calls to Congress for bipartisanship and the passing of important legislation to help fix our economy (and help the American people).
When looking at election results from 2008 on cnn.com (Election Center 2008), several things suggest that Obama had an electoral mandate. First, he won 53% of the popular vote. The majority of citizens voted for him, his character, and his policies. Secondly, Obama also won the Electoral College. He only needed 270 votes to win, yet gained 365. I find this important because he clearly exceeded the requirement to become elected. The Electoral College itself is important to his electoral mandate because a situation similar to the 2000 election didn’t occur. In that election, the popular vote winner did not receive the majority of the electoral votes, which I would argue, decreased the Electoral College winner’s (the President Elect’s) electoral mandate. Thirdly, I would imagine many voters were fed up with the Republican Party and their handling of the White House with George W. Bush. Obama’s appeal to many citizens was his slogan, “Change We Can Believe In”. He gave large numbers of American voters hope and belief for the future. He offered up change for Washington D.C. and placed a lot of emphasis on bipartisanship. In my opinion, this is what “sealed the deal” for voters to vote for Democratic Presidential Nominee, Barack Obama, giving him an electoral mandate.
I also believe President Barack Obama still enjoys this electoral mandate into his presidency. It is a little more difficult for me to interpret his mandate now because we are still in the Honeymoon Period of his presidency (the first 100 days). His approval rating will still be relatively high during this time frame because he has just taken office and is getting into the “swing of things”, and the media tends to be a bit more favorable as well during this time. Obama does seem to be delivering on some of his promises made during the campaign, such as bipartisanship and change to Washington D.C. as mentioned above. And, I think a lot of citizens see this in his calls to Congress for bipartisanship and the passing of important legislation to help fix our economy (and help the American people).
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Obama’s Budget Faces Test Among Party Barons
Obama has given his budget proposals to Democratic “Barons” in congress. The proposal was given to them with instructions from the president to “fill in the blanks”. But, these Democratic Congressmen are also taking things out.
I would think that Democrats would mostly agree on the types of things in this budget, including reducing tax breaks for the top 1 or 2 percent of the population in terms of wealth. But I was wrong. Congressmen of the president’s own party are making significant changes to Obama’s budget proposal.
I would think that Democrats would mostly agree on the types of things in this budget, including reducing tax breaks for the top 1 or 2 percent of the population in terms of wealth. But I was wrong. Congressmen of the president’s own party are making significant changes to Obama’s budget proposal.
Exit Polls and the Race Gap
Supporting evidence for the existence of the race gap still exists in election results today. According to CNN exit polls for the 2008 election, Sen. John McCain won the majority (55%) of white votes in the electorate (in which whites make up 74%). Sen. Barack Obama carried every other race listed on the exit poll. This includes: African Americans (95%), Latinos (67%), Asians (62%), and Others (66%), although these groups make up a substantially smaller portion of the electorate, 13%, 9%, 2%, and 3% respectively.
Looking back on the previous presidential election in 2004, we see that the race gap was an important factor too. In Laura R. Olson and John C Green’s article, “Introduction- ‘Gapology’ and the Presidential Vote,” they create a list of the largest “gaps” in the 2004 election. And not surprisingly, the race gap is at the top of the list. Bush won 58.7% of the white vote, and Kerry won 72.4% of the non white vote.
After analyzing the data from the past two presidential elections, it is clear that the race gap is still an important factor in presidential elections. Republican presidential nominees will most likely win the majority of the white votes and Democratic presidential nominees have a good chance of winning the majority of the non white votes.
*Side note: this week I learned that when analyzing exit polls, demographics are commonly used. These are things such as age, race, income, and religion or religious commitment (how many times per week Americans attend church). When looking at the data it is important to remember that these demographics don’t always work solo. In fact, many times two or more can work together.
I had a feeling when analyzing the race gap, that something else could be causing the gap, such as income. CNN’s exit polls do a good job of combining demographics. After looking at the table “Vote by Income and Race” it is clear that a race gap still exists, regardless of income.
Looking back on the previous presidential election in 2004, we see that the race gap was an important factor too. In Laura R. Olson and John C Green’s article, “Introduction- ‘Gapology’ and the Presidential Vote,” they create a list of the largest “gaps” in the 2004 election. And not surprisingly, the race gap is at the top of the list. Bush won 58.7% of the white vote, and Kerry won 72.4% of the non white vote.
After analyzing the data from the past two presidential elections, it is clear that the race gap is still an important factor in presidential elections. Republican presidential nominees will most likely win the majority of the white votes and Democratic presidential nominees have a good chance of winning the majority of the non white votes.
*Side note: this week I learned that when analyzing exit polls, demographics are commonly used. These are things such as age, race, income, and religion or religious commitment (how many times per week Americans attend church). When looking at the data it is important to remember that these demographics don’t always work solo. In fact, many times two or more can work together.
I had a feeling when analyzing the race gap, that something else could be causing the gap, such as income. CNN’s exit polls do a good job of combining demographics. After looking at the table “Vote by Income and Race” it is clear that a race gap still exists, regardless of income.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
GOP's road to comeback begins with '09 races
Since losing the White House to the Democrats in the 2008 presidential elections, the party states that they are on the road to comeback. Their claim is backed up by the winning of a Senate election and two congressional elections. But they claim it’s only the beginning.
Minority Opportunities in Congress
The minority party in the U.S. Congress, although seemingly useless, actually plays an important role in that of a democracy. The authors of our book, Hetherington and Keefe, point to a study by Charles O. Jones. In his study Jones identifies two types of forces that work alone and in combinations to shape the minority party. He classifies these forces as internal (inside the Congress) and external (those that originate outside of Congress). Examples of an external force include: the political strength of the minority party in the electorate, degree of unity within the parties outside of the Congress, and the power of the president and his willingness to use it. Internal forces are things such as: the majority’s margin over the minority party, effectiveness of both party’s leadership, and how long the party has been in a minority status.
The book points out that strategies for the minority party aren’t determined by party members or rank-and-file members, but rather are simply determined by, “opportunities that present themselves from time to time,” (Hetherington and Keefe 175). The situations that the party has little to no control over are the things that are going to influence the minority’s behavior.
I would imagine then, that the 214 Republican members who show up to work every day are waiting for the opportunity to present itself. Yes, they can’t do much to stop the Democratic coalition (a Democrat-controlled Congress and Democratic President Obama), but they can show up to work every day and wait for an opportunity to arise. There really isn’t much else they can do.
The book points out that strategies for the minority party aren’t determined by party members or rank-and-file members, but rather are simply determined by, “opportunities that present themselves from time to time,” (Hetherington and Keefe 175). The situations that the party has little to no control over are the things that are going to influence the minority’s behavior.
I would imagine then, that the 214 Republican members who show up to work every day are waiting for the opportunity to present itself. Yes, they can’t do much to stop the Democratic coalition (a Democrat-controlled Congress and Democratic President Obama), but they can show up to work every day and wait for an opportunity to arise. There really isn’t much else they can do.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)