Chloe Hain - What a Clinton Supreme Court Would Mean for America

Chloe Hain

I chose to read the article What a Clinton Supreme Court Would Mean for America by William Bennett because I think it is really interesting to hear from a Republican how they feel about the ongoing Presidential election. I, myself, am a Hillary supporter and believe that she is fit for the Presidency unlike Mr. Trump. I think that Donald Trump has questionable morals and uncomforting views. This article was written by a devout conservative and his views on certain subjects extremely bother me. He writes the following regarding transgender bathroom laws, “Don't be so naive as to think boys won't abuse these policies and force their way into female bathrooms and locker rooms. Parents and teachers won't be able to stop them. And aside from sexual misconduct and assault, this policy could mean the end of men's and women's competitive athletics as we know it,” (Bennett). This quote just strikes a fire in my mind. Trans women have never EVER, not once, ever been a threat to another woman in the bathroom due to her genitalia. I don’t understand why it is so hard for people, particularly conservative individuals, to accept that gender isn’t based solely on sex. They are completely different concepts and it is so disrespectful to not use a person’s preferred pronouns or deny them of basic rights. The author also has controversial views on abortions. I believe that abortion should be a right and a decision made by a woman because it is her body and she can decide what happens to it. The author does not believe in abortion which does not surprise me. I think that most of William Bennett’s views are the opposite of mine, which is not a bad thing. He is exercising political thinking in his own way and it is interesting to hear from the opposing side.

What Black People Hear When Donald Trump Asks for Their Vote - Sofia Chaudruc

The article I chose is “What Black People Hear When Donald Trump Asks for Their Vote” by Jamelle Bouie. It shows the underlying tone Trump ensues in his campaigns and tweets. In class we are studying the effects the media has on politics and this article is a perfect example. Trump tweets many statements and all he says for campaigning is televised and publicized. “The Democratic Party has failed and betrayed the African-American community. Democratic crime policies, education policies, and economic policies have produced only more crime, more broken homes, and more poverty,” Trump said in a recent speech in Milwaukee. Bouie explains how this quote, and many of Trump's others, treat black Americans as mere objects. He furthers this by stating that black Americans are political actors making choices based on their interests as they see them, but Trump (and in general, most politicians) treat black people like they are all dupes. This is very relevant because we are currently in the 2016 presidential election and it’s a very unique one. The African American population is about 41.7 million and Trump is a very well know man nationally and globally, so this article affects a lot of people. And all people should care about the subject matter of this article because it’s an example of how the oppression of African Americans as early as the 1500’s affects today, treating black people as if they are dupes of the government/powerful white people.

Why is Trump so confident he can drastically decrease crime rates across the US?

Donald Trump's Bigotry - Jacob Greifer

In today's world of social media and constant news exposure, people are better capable of being political thinkers. We are surrounded by headlines and stories every day, and this allows us to form our own opinions on issues, such as the presidential election. These opinions are highlighted in Charles M. Blow's article, "Donald Trump's Bigotry," which examines the details of the public's views on Donald Trump.

As the title states, many Americans think of Trump as a bigot. More interesting than the 59% of voters that think this however, is that 29% of likely Republican voters agree. Of this percentage, Blow notes that Trump should mostly be concerned with a certain demographic: college-educated whites. This is because most people with degrees are political thinkers, and can heavily influence the outcome of the election. As a result, Trump has done what he can to throw away his bigot label. Outreaches have been made to African Americans and Hispanics to try and gain their support, but these groups were ones that he had shown little interest to previously. In reality, he's just speaking to his all white audience, and these outreaches are merely his attempts to show he's not a bigot.

If most of the public views Trump as such, why is this race so close? Nobody wants a bigot to be the leader of their country?

The Republican Party - Matthew Reynolds

The republican party should not be satisfied with their presidential candidates in both the 2012, and 2016 elections. GOP presidential candidates “crashed and burned” this year. Their campaigns made little progress and didn’t pose a threat to Trump in the slightest. In September of 2015, 81% of Iowa voters said that Republicans in Congress made too many compromises with President Barack Obama. But didn’t it seem like it was Obama, rather, who was being limited by a republican controlled Congress. There has been very little compromise in Washington given that the republicans in Congress are definitely of the more conservative side. Candidates who have demeanor and qualifications that would normally meet the credentials of a presidential nomination doesn’t matter as much this year. The American people are looking for a president further from establishment than we are used to, but yet the Republican party continues to pump establishment-oriented candidates. An upset outsider (Trump) was going to get the GOP nomination.

This main idea is incredibly relevant as we are approaching the presidential election. It’s been nearly a decade since America has seen a Republican hold office, and could be a couple more years before we do again. Personally I consider myself a Democrat, but I’d love to see a Republican candidate I can relate to. I firmly believe the right wing can do better than Trump.

If Republicans truly believe that Clinton is so horribly flawed, then why is she leading in the polls?

#BlackLivesMatter - Griffin Gallas

We live in a day of age during this growing social media takeover where anything posted on the world wide web is recorded for media analysis at a later date. Mid July in 2013 the twitter icon #BlackLivesMatter was used in a tweet. It was soon after this date that thanks to PRC (Pew Research Center) that we noticed the newly created hashtag burst in popularity. During the summer of 2014, two brutal murders of Michael Brown and Eric Garner in the hands of local police officers struck America with what they would soon identify as a movement. #BlackLivesMatter following the killings of these two innocent men was mentioned nearly 200,000 times on Twitter reassuring the strength of this soon to notice racial movement.

The understanding of how this trend started and what it means is important to recognize during this time of constant change in media trends. It is important that we American citizens stop turning our back on the increase in murders by police officers. Not only are these officers killing large numbers of people but we are observing a racial tendency between white police officers and african american “suspects” that we should be aware about. “On Dec. 4, one day after a grand jury declined to indict the police officer whose chokehold led to Mr. Garner’s death, #BlackLivesMatter appeared 189,210 times on Twitter. It was mentioned 160,810 times the following day, too.”

The entirety of this article holds its ground with its vast number of data points thanks to PRC. The growth in popularity of the hashtag reminds me of the need for more political thinking throughout society and how we have been talking about this in class. I say this because I recognize a hashtag that i've seen a number of times but question why I didn't push myself to educate on the topic. Will laws be changed in America to take control of violence involving police officers and innocent young Americans?

How Trump Exposed America’s White Identity Crisis -- Nuala Brennan

This article was written by a southern republican black man who proudly believes in many republican beliefs, and defends the party when it is accused of being racist. However, the author, Isaac Bailey, believes that Donald Trump has brought out the true status of racism in America. Trump has exposed America for being as bigoted as it really is by threatening to kick out all the Mexicans and Muslims. People thought that after Obama was elected, we had beat racism, but Trump has been, “a blessing and a curse,” in showing that that is indeed false. Now Bailey hopes that Trump has opened the eyes of the population to see that America is still extremely unjust and racist. It has sparked many uprisings and protest that would have not occurred without Trump. Although it seems crazy to say, if it weren’t for Trump’s racist comments, people would not have been as scared, and would not have started taking American racism as seriously. Bailey believes that this now puts a lot more power in the hands of white Americans. Americans of color are most likely going to be against Trump due to how racist he is, leaving only the white Americans left over to decide whether or not he will be our next president.

Do you agree that Trump’s outspoken racism has been a good thing, in the way that it raises awareness, or a bad thing in that it brings out the extreme conservative Americans who are also incredibly racist?

What the world could lose in America's Presidential Election- Jake Urdangen

 

After looking around realclearpolitics.com, hoping to find some sort of article that I could understand pretty well, I came across an interesting one regarding the effects after this election. This article called What the world could lose in America’s presidential election, starts out by talking about the predicted outcome of if either Clinton or Trump won the presidency. Then it goes on to bring up things that have happened in other countries over the past decade. The author talks about how the internet has become a weapon of control. Donald Trump is not a father figure for our country that we would want in the white house. He has endorsed torture and other illegal acts of war, disparaged freedom of the press, undermined a free judiciary, campaigned by invective rather than debate, and hasn’t even let the public know about his tax returns! Even if he loses, which most hope he does, we still tend to wonder how he has made it this far in the campaign. It almost makes me feel bad that such a large percent of our country believes and is willing to fight for his political views. From Chapter 1 of the American Democracy, by Thomas Patterson, it talks about how important it is for us citizens to think politically. Instead of following social medias bias towards every political issue, we must come together. Political thinking is a key to responsible citizenship, but many citizens avoid it by virtue of paying scant attention to politics. The tools of political science can contribute to effective political thinking. The United States is a nation that was formed on a set of ideals. These ideals are today the basis of american culture. Although imperfect in practice,these ideals have guided what America has tried to achieve politically.

Some would say that the main idea of this article is really that democracy is a crucial part of having a success in office. Hiatt states, “But democracy promotion faded as a goal once Obama moved into the White House. He hoped that setting a good example at home — ending torture, closing (as he hoped to do) Guantanamo — would resonate overseas, but the results were disappointing” (Hiatt). That is basically saying that having citizens and allies having your back is what a successful president needs. Obama, as great as he did these past 8 years, unfortunately was set off on the wrong foot with democracy, coming in after George Bush. We should care about this because I along with my peers are the future of this generation. If we could learn at this young age how important stuff like majoritarianism and pluralism is, than we could bounce right back. It is important to address alliances, and reduce terrorism, but democracy needs to dwindle towards gold, instead of dwindling away, for our country to become improved.

Before I end here, I want to impose a question for you all: Is gaining majoritarianism and coming together as one unit, more important than sustaining peace and monetary needs in the United States?

 

What The World Could Lose in America's presidential election- Jake Urdangen

 

After looking around realclearpolitics.com, hoping to find some sort of article that I could understand pretty well, I came across an interesting one regarding the effects after this election. This article called What the world could lose in America’s presidential election, starts out by talking about the predicted outcome of if either Clinton or Trump won the presidency. Then it goes on to bring up things that have happened in other countries over the past decade. The author talks about how the internet has become a weapon of control. Donald Trump is not a father figure for our country that we would want in the white house. He has endorsed torture and other illegal acts of war, disparaged freedom of the press, undermined a free judiciary, campaigned by invective rather than debate, and hasn’t even let the public know about his tax returns! Even if he loses, which most hope he does, we still tend to wonder how he has made it this far in the campaign. It almost makes me feel bad that such a large percent of our country believes and is willing to fight for his political views. From Chapter 1 of the American Democracy, by Thomas Patterson, it talks about how important it is for us citizens to think politically. Instead of following social medias bias towards every political issue, we must come together. Political thinking is a key to responsible citizenship, but many citizens avoid it by virtue of paying scant attention to politics. The tools of political science can contribute to effective political thinking. The United States is a nation that was formed on a set of ideals. These ideals became Americans’ common bond and today are the basis of Americans’ political culture. Although imperfect in practice, these ideals have guided what generations of Americans have tried to achieve politically.

Some would say that the main idea of this article is really that democracy is a crucial part of having a success in office. Hiatt states, “But democracy promotion faded as a goal once Obama moved into the White House. He hoped that setting a good example at home — ending torture, closing (as he hoped to do) Guantanamo — would resonate overseas, but the results were disappointing.” That is basically saying that having citizens and allies having your back is what a successful president needs. Obama, as great as he did these past 8 years, unfortunately was set off on the wrong foot with democracy, coming in after George Bush. We should care about this because I along with my peers are the future of this generation. If we could learn at this young age how important stuff like majoritalisitism and pluralism is, than we could bounce right back. It is important to address alliances, and reduce terrorism, but democracy needs to dwindle towards gold, instead of dwindling away, for our country to become improved.

Before I end here, I want to impose a question for you all: Is gaining majoritarianism and coming together as one unit, more important than sustaining peace and monetary needs in the United States?

 

Trump Is Already Helping Putin Consolidate Control of Ukraine - Daniel Frederick

    

       While most Americans are not interested in the affairs of other nations, especially the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, there has been much controversy and development regarding this foreign issue in recent weeks. This article highlighted the intensity of the Ukrainian conflict, and how the United States’ presidential election, especially GOP candidate Donald Trump, is impacting the decisions and reactions of these two nations. 

   This conflict is extremely significant in regards to both Russian aggression in Eastern Europe and the presidential elections because it has the ability to destabilize much of the eastern hemisphere and potentially draw the US into a heated, conventional war, and that it highlights the attitude and possible actions of a candidate running for the highest political office in the US, if not the world. In the weeks leading up to the United States presidential elections, Mr. Trump has said many controversial statements that include “[Putin] is not going into Ukraine”, which is a fact that has been refuted on many occasions, especially with evidence from the Russian annexation of Crimea, and “Wouldn't it be great if we got along with Russia?", a nation that is known to harshly oppress minorities and has occupied hundreds of miles of territory in the Donbas region. Days later after making these statements, Mr. Trump openly supported and justified President Putin’s argument that Russia has the right to claim and take the sovereign territory of another nation, which is against international law. Mr. Putin is exploiting this support from Donald Trump, and has recently staged tens of thousands of troops on the Russian-Ukrainian border without concerning the American population.

Another reason for the significance of this issue is how President Putin’s actions have gone unnoticed or unopposed, and what this means for both Ukraine and the Baltic States. This is due to the lack of political capital or willpower within the international community regarding the Ukrainian conflict. Denis Volkov, the spokesperson for the polling service Levada, said “In this dead-end situation, Putin is going to push his own agenda, using the moment when there is no real public interest in the Ukraine affair in the world” (Politico, 2016). In order to engage in political thinking, citizens must expose themselves to the realities of the world through reading or watching the news, and clearly, many individuals are apathetic to the well-being and livelihood of millions of people threatened by war and occupation. What are your beliefs about this problem, and how would you like the presidential candidate you personally support address this issue?

 - Daniel Frederick

 

Trump Changes Stance on Immigration - Joshua O'Steen

Donald Trump giving speech at a rally in Concord, North Carolina

In the past week there has been a lot of press coverage of the recent ‘pivot’ that Trump made concerning immigration policy. As many know, Trump has been an avid supporter of deporting as many illegal immigrants as possible and building his infamous wall along the US-Mexican border. However, it was only recently that Trump completely changed his tone on immigration by saying that he would “work with [illegal immigrants]”. The article clearly shows that there are a lot of Trump supporters who are angry and upset on with the change of tone and policy. In fact, at the rally where he pivoted, many of his supporters shouted out at him in anger accusing him of being a ‘flip-flop’.

This sudden change of policy by the Trump campaign is important to look at because it can either help him or drastically hurt him. It is after all his tough immigration policy that won over many of his current supporters. This is where the idea of majoritarianism comes in from chapter 1. Majoritarianism is the idea that the majority not only prevails in elections, but also in policy determination. So then, if the majority of people support tough and restrictive immigration policy, then will they still vote for Trump? Additionally, if Trump were to hypothetically win the election, would Trump follow through on his softer immigration policy? A lot of questions arise from Trump’s shocking change of tone, but the good news is that Trump’s new policy isn’t as terrible as his last one.

Trump’s new policy certainly is less ‘tough’ on immigrants. Trump has actually suggested that not all illegal immigrants should be deported and that some should actually stay if they have no criminal record and find a way to pay taxes. He is however still against amnesty, which would make some immigrants legal citizens. His new policy could be due to many factors such as the low support from hispanics to the low poll ratings. The biggest question that arises from Trump’s new change in policy and tone is whether it will help Trump or hurt him?

Ryan Harrison Colin Kaepernick article

   

This article is about an NFL quarterback named Colin Kaepernick taking a stand against police brutality against African Americans. The way he did this was by not standing for the national anthem. He says that he will continue to sit for the nation anthem until he feels like the country is representing everyone the way they are supposed to. The reason why this article is important is because police brutality against African Americans is a very hot topic in the media. Many professional athletes are standing up for black rights during an American crisis. This reminds of of one of America’s core values, equality. The acronym LIES is ironic because African Americans are not treated equally in the U.S. Kaepernick is huge supporter of the black lives matter movement and he shows his support often on social media. I think he is supporting a great cause, but I don't think he's doing it in the right way. As you can see in the picture he is sitting while the rest of his organization is standing. This act is isolating him from his teammates and much of the country. And to me it looks as if he doesn't want to be seen, because he is behind the huge water bottle carts. If he wanted to be strong and stand up for police brutality I think he should have done something more noticeable. American is not going to change because the backup quarterback of a sub par team didn't stand for the national anthem. He should have gotten a group of teammates to do it with him or found another way to express how he feels. Although I disagree with how he protested, he is still standing up for a great cause. Do you think that any NFL players will follow his lead and publicly take a stand against police brutality once the regular season starts?

GEORGE SOROS Michael Barrera

The group DCF leaked Clinton Emails and  has exposed George Soros (prominent businessman and very wealthy person) contribution to the Clinton foundation has been exposed. Soros has funneled billions of dollars over the past two decades to the Clinton foundation. The media has chosen not to cover this information. The media has said they haven't covered this news because the public already has knowledge about this philanthropic situation. But that's not really the point, the rhetoric exposes the forest of Soros donations. Soros has supported almost every left wing organization and not one sector of policies have been untouched. Soros is known to be a megalomaniac. He is known to be so philanthropic to a point that it makes no sense. The charities he donates to are unrelated such as “climate change” to “Greek immigration policies.” but underneath the surface there is a overall purpose. He is trying to work to weaken the ability of national and local authorities in Western democracies to uphold the laws and values of their nations and communities. They work to hinder markets no matter what sector. Basically Soros wants to overthrow democracy and eliminate the proprietary control of the Government.

Black Lives Matter, which has received $650,000 from Soros-controlled groups over the past year, this suggest police are tools for black oppression the police were universally admired in the US as the domestic equivalent of the military. BLM emerged as a social force bent on politicizing support for police. As a result Black lives matter has been accused for several police murders throughout the country. The demoralization and intimidation is very likely to cause a steep incline in violence.

The emails also show that Soros contribution to organizations on Europe has corrupted the elections in western Europe. This has caused politicians in Europe to win that had open border policies immigrants from the Arab world and to financially and otherwise support journalists who report sympathetically on immigrants His groups have influenced immigration reforms throughout the whole world, Europe, America, Mexico, the Middle East and Africa. Soros-supported groups, for instance, stand behind the push not only for gay marriage but for unisex public bathrooms. This makes in society under governments to question the traditional values that have been held in their country for such a long time, again Soros makes citizens subvert the government thus making it impossible for the government to maintain order or for societies to retain their unique identities and values.

Chapter 1 discusses; Liberty, to act freely upon your beliefs, provided they do not infringe the freedom and well being of others. George Soros the prominent  Turkish businessman has done this exactly. His philanthropic contributions to multiple organizations is him acting freely upon his beliefs. He is a dual citizen so he is granted the rights of the constitution. All the organizations he has given money too has benefited the groups so he is not infringing the freedom and well being of others. Basically Soros is using this to his advantage because nobody can restrict him from giving money to these independent organizations. We should care about his contributions because they are creating chaos all around the world, like mentioned earlier he

The thrust of Soros’s efforts from Ferguson to Berlin to Jerusalem is to induce mayhem and chaos as local authorities, paralyzed by his supported groups, are unable to secure their societies or even argue coherently that they deserve security Soros calling for  “direct democracy” is nothing more than calling mob rules. Basically he's a left wing extremist. The strategy he uses is pretty savvy. His support for all these liberal movements makes him look like the good guy and his philanthropic efforts even more. But in reality his overall effort is to overthrow the traditions of a nation.  wants society to become aware of the “regulations” they have been constricted too. His group's effort is to get these people angry at Government making it harder for the government of that nation to maintain laws.

The authors rhetoric is to reveal that we must not fall into this trap and become conscious ourselves. This is important to know because we must stand with the national institutions that grant security, in accordance with the rule of law and uphold/defend their national values and traditions.

"Why Black Voters Are Rejecting Trump" Ben Ellman

The article mainly talks about how and why Trump struggles to gain the black vote and that he will most likely be unable to gain it with the approach he currently has. The article shows why Trump struggles with black votes, and ultimately why the Republicans do as well. It documents his attempts to gain votes, and turn his image around with blacks. Trump tried to reach out to black and Hispanic voters, though his attempt will probably not work. Polls show that Trump has less black vote than some representatives who wanted segregation got. Blacks and Hispanics are also more optimistic about the future of the country. Trump's campaign slogan denounces this, and he runs on the idea that the country is headed in the wrong direction. This makes him much less attractive to most and blacks and Hispanics. Though this outreach may help Trump gain some of the black vote, it will most likely not be as much as he may think. 

The article's main point is important because Trump's attempt to change the voting habits of an entire demographic would change the political landscape. Republicans have recently tried to reach out to blacks in an attempt to gain votes, unsuccessfully. Blacks have historically and recently voted for Democrats exclusively. This has been a decisive factor in the Democrats in winning elections, and Republicans seek to change that. The current chapter talks about politicians spinning information to suit them, and Trump has done this in order to try and persuade black voters to vote for him. He twists statistics to make it seem like blacks are worse off than they actually are. 

Has outreach like this happened in the past by other politicians? If so, have they worked?

What Republican Turncoats Forget- Anika Blitzstein

After browsing through the obviously biased “Real Clear Politics” website, trying to find an article that peaked my interest, I stumbled upon one written by Stephen Moore titled What Republican Turncoats Forget. Moore began the article with a snippet into two of conversations he had with successful republicans.  Moore asks both people who they would vote for in the election.  One says that he would not vote for either Hillary or Trump, the other replied that there is no one else to vote for but Trump.  To the ladder, Moore seemed to agree with.  Moore then goes on to complain about how republicans are voting for Hillary.  While he understands when republicans choose not to vote for either of the candidates, he can not comprehend why they would support the democratic one.  This author is very obviously biased and his article makes no sense.  He bashes what he likes to call “Republican Turncoats”-Republicans who decide to vote for Hillary.  He thinks that letting Democrats win for a third term would provide a devastating blow to the Republican party.  This article just exemplifies the bigotry of the far right side.  They are so obsessed with a Republican being in the house that they don’t even care who it is.  Ideally, voters should vote for the person that they want in the white house, regardless of what party the person belongs to.  Society is so obsessed with winning that they are missing the big picture.  People need to let go of their fragile ego and really think about who they want running their country.  This election is not a joke, as people are making it one, voting for Trump “just cause” is selfish and an excellent demonstration of privilege.  According to the theory of political thinking, it is good to vote for the candidate that has the same beliefs as you.  Voting for Trump just because he is the republican candidate regardless of whether he has the same views as you is going against this theory. Why do you think some Republicans feel threatened that other Republicans aren't voting for Trump?

Changing the Political Map- Izzy Lobin

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/is-2016-redrawing-the-political-map/article/2600135

The question asked by the article is whether or not the political map is changing. The political map in an election is the mess of red, blue, and purple states in the union. This is when red shows a state as likely to vote for the republican candidate; blue states are likely to vote for the democratic candidate; and purple states are in between, with the potential to vote for either candidate. The author’s, Michael Barone, main point throughout the article is that the state’s colors on the map have recently changed from being static for nearly two decades. Barone’s primary evidence suggests this is because of the fact that 40+ states voted for the same party in the last four elections, yet this year, several of those, such as Arizona and Georgia, are breaking off from previous trends.

Barone points the cause of this out, saying that Trump and Clinton have changed the norms in terms of voting trends. Whereas white non-college voters have previously been voting primarily for democrats in recent year, they now are leaning overwhelmingly towards Trump, as have older populations. At the same time, Trump’s weakness in the section of college-educated and young voters has allowed Hillary to take substantial leads in Virginia and Colorado, two purple states, because of high education and young populations. Barone’s point is that trends shift and, therefore, the political map can change rapidly and aggressively.

The idea that the political map can change quite easily with the introduction of new candidates and new generations of voters, is extremely important to Americans. This not only confirms the fact that the ideal of indirect government control, introduced in the Constitution, is still relevant in today’s America, but more importantly shows that we, as young Americans, have the ability to change the direction of our country. This is one of the main ideals and cultural beliefs of America, self-governance/indirect governance (as pointed out by Patterson), at work. By changing simple longstanding trends, new voters have changed how one of the most important maps in the country looks.

In the end, an important question to ask is; What longstanding trends do you think the next several voting generations change (including us)? And how will it change the political map, or how politicians from both parties will represent themselves?

RE: "I am a Bernie Sanders support and I refuse to vote for Hillary"

The Author of this article titled “I am a Bernie Sanders support and I refuse to vote for Hillary” insists that Democratic voters should make cautious decisions on whether  Hillary should be president of the United States. Stated in the article, the author gave specific reasons why she wasn’t voting to Hillary. She states that due to many inconsiderate laws, bills, and actions she’s taken over the years, because of this Hillary should not be trusted as our President. The author also includes the lack of progressiveness the Democratic party has failed to exemplified. The author in this article is using one of the things we’ve learned called majoritarian which is the completion of both parties by calling both the republicans and democrats for what she feels like they lack in.

What are your thoughts about this article, do you think she is making a rightful decision by voting for neither parties?

This Race Isn't Over - Claire Wootton

http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/note-to-msm-this-race-isnt-over/

The main point of the article is arguing against the more and more commonly held belief that the election at this point is set - with Hilary as the winner. The author supports this by pointing out that many of the same people believed Jeb Bush to be a shoo in for the republican nomination and by making the argument that the presidential debates coming up will give Trump an opportunity to shine. The article is relevant and important because while some people are beginning to pay less attention to the election because they don’t believe Trump can win, the article shows that there are still people out there that a fully behind Trump and is a good reminder for everyone that the election isn’t over yet. The blog the article is from, lifezette, is a well known conservative blog (which obviously adds to the potential bias in any articles), that was mentioned in our summer reading for being one of the few popular news blogs that are known the be conservative.

Do you think that if the polls are showing one candidate as much farther ahead than the other it is okay to begin to make the claim that they will win, or are the polls not a good enough measure?

What Trump Gets Right About Alliances - Michael Schroeder

Michael Schroeder

Ms. Gordon

AP U.S. Government and Politics

8-29-16

The article that I selected is titled: What Trump Gets Right About Alliances. Doug Bandow writes about how he believes that America has made alliances with too many countries and that Trump won’t back certain alliances. Bandow believes that America has made alliances with countries that wouldn’t defend us if we got attacked, so we shouldn’t continue defending them. He points out that in Trump has said that he will not continue to give aid to and continue defending countries which don’t defend us back, and countries that can defend themselves perfectly fine. Bandow describes how no nation has or will soon have any reason to attack the U.S., so we don’t face any threat which would need an allies assistance. He thinks that using our resources to defend other nations, and believing that they will defend us if anything happens is a waste. He doesn’t cover once in the article about how large groups such as Isis have already declared war and hatred towards all Americans.

The idea that Trump plans to not defend our allies is important because it causes a widespread panic. It causes the citizens and leaders of the countries to question the legitimacy of our commitment to defend them. There may not be an obvious reason why we should care about other countries being worried about America withdrawing or not supporting our alliances, but there is a reason to care. What if something bad happens to America and we need help? Some people believe the idea that America may need foreign help is unpatriotic, but that is not true. The “American Dream” is starting from nothing and through smart decisions making a great life. We don’t want to be so overcome with pride that we don’t ask for help, possibly making our situation worse. Some other people may believe that nothing bad could happen to America, well that’s not true. We could be attacked by a foreign power, but some people don’t believe that is possible. We could also have a natural disaster. We could have a hurricane twice the size of Katrina hit us, have the San Andreas Fault let out a gigantic earthquake, or even have the Yellowstone Supervolcano erupt and cause earthquakes at the same time. The volcano is roughly 10,000 years overdue to erupt, and the fault is overdue as well. I know that I have gone a little off topic from alliances, but the point is that no one would want to give any foreign aide regardless if we are allies or not, to a country that only helps out itself.

America’s profound sense of individualism is a leading factor to why some people believe that it isn’t right to help out other people when they have nothing in return to give. Another one of America’s four core political values is equality, but how can we claim to believe in equality, when we let our own individualistic self desire prevent us from helping out others to can’t help out themselves?

The Bare Truth About Burkinis - Ginger Haller

The article I chose is about how France is banning the Burkini, a swimming garment typically worn by Muslim women that conceals everything but their hands, feet, and face. The author Steve Chapman is against the ban because he thinks it oppresses Muslims and takes away their freedom to chose what they want to wear. He also points out that in France women can choose to go topless at beaches, but for some reason the modesty a burkini provides is not allowed. The government thinks that all Muslim women are being forced to dress the way they do and that by banning burkinis they will stop Islam's enslavement of women's bodies. This means France is telling women what to wear, in order to teach them that no one can tell them what to wear. This law is a contradiction in itself.

The representation of Islam in our society is huge today. Islam extremists put the religion in a very bad light and it causes people to have biases against Muslims. Some people want to deny them of basic rights by racially profiling or even banning what they can wear, but this is not the answer. All people should have the right to dress modestly and taking that away from them is just unfair.

This infringes on the core value of liberty. Banning burkinis is not allowing individuals to think and act as they choose, it also prevents religious freedom as well. This is an example of how the Constitution separates the United States from the rest of the world. This would probably never happen in America because our right to wear religious garments is strongly protected.

Do you think France decided to ban Burkinis in an effort to end oppression towards Muslims, or was the decision made more out of Islamophobia?

Fear Unveiled: Why Banning the Burqa Makes No Sense - Ben Sollinger

The Main Idea of this article is that Germany’s ban on the burqa is illogical. The problem is that banning the burqa will do nothing to stop terrorism, but will only remove the thought of terrorism from eyesight. The Germans behind this push are trying to remove everything that they dislike about Islam from society. They are also making the assumption that all women who wear the burqa are being forced to. The anti-Islam Germans also see themselves as the humane liberators of these “oppressed” Islamic women. The truth is that although some of these women are forced into wearing the burqa, there are many women who enjoy wearing the burqa because it creates a connection with God, or Allah.

This is important because it shows that lack of tolerance in society. This shows the lack of knowledge towards others. This forced “liberation” will also likely create a response, and will cause conflict. This could maybe even make the very problem they are trying to fix, worse. The only way that the Germans goal can be accomplished, is if the Muslim women adapt to these rules themselves, not by force. These women do not pose any threat to the Germans freedom, nor will they create a degradation of women’s rights in Germany. These Muslim do not pose any harm to the Germans.

Is this action to ban blamed on those who came up with the idea, or the media more making the connection between radical Islam and the burqa?