This week we were going to do a reading on Gay Marriage but that issue is evolving quickly right now so we will wait until we get to Civil Liberties unit.
We are going to instead look at the evolution and hopes of the Tea Party. Please first look at ALL of these sources:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/vp/38805749#38805828
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/23/us/politics/23rubio.html?_r=1&hp
http://elections.nytimes.com/2010/senate/florida?ref=politics
http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/08/22/sunshine-state-political-shift-establishment-candidates-favored-win-0
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/22/AR2010082201288.html
An important key to politics and political parties is to remember that all politics are LOCAL. But we have "National" political parties:Republican and Democratic parties. a rising sect of the Republican party, the "Tea Party" started by Libertarians who wanted smaller government budgets and a smaller overall government involvement- fiscal conservatives.
Social conservatives quickly joined in and now the beliefs of the "Tea Party" are almost as diverse ans that of the straight of D and Rs.
In every midterm election the party in power loses seats. This is a 100% fact. How many seats is up to campaigning and relative party successes or failures.
QUESTION OF THE WEEK: How are voters supposed to identify with candidates and make informed decisions? Can they rely on party label? Does party label mean anything? What is the role of the Tea Party. Think about the Bull Moose Party, the Progressive Party....... How do they pick a party if issues are so diverse from state to state......all politics is local.... what do the Tea Partiers give to the Republican Party....?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In these times, it is becoming increasingly harder for voters to identify with candidates, especially if they are planning on staying with their party of choice.Making informed decisions has also become nearly impossible considering that political motives have become increasingly more important. At this point, a party label cannot be relied on to determine nearly anything about the candidate, considering how shifty their view points have become in recent elections. Voters need to inform themselves on issues of concern, rather than relying on the spokesperson of their party. They may even come to realize that those who are in charge in their party no longer align themselves with how the voter believes an issue should be handled.
ReplyDeleteThe Tea Party is doing various things for the Republican party as well as politics as a whole. They believe that they are bringing Americans back to the roots of what the country was founded on. Also, they make a point to stress fiscal responsibility. Within the Tea Party there are more radical claims made, including that Barack Obama is not a US citizen,as well as other more racially charged assertions, that are leading observers to believe that this movement may not really be as beneficial as some would like. In terms of the Republican party, this movement is both helping and hurting it. The basic movement backs some Republican ideals on a stricter scale. However, the negative press on issues such as the racial remarks are starting to raise some concern as to what the real motives of this movement are. This could be seen as derragatory for the Republicans.
For a voter to actually identify and to feel generally comfortable with a candidate is fairly difficult. Sticking to an individual's favored party is still generally not too challenging to pull off, but we see more and more people switching to different parties. Then again, as Alison was saying, party tags don't mean as much as they used to, as candidates from both parties are likely to have views and opinions that may float away from the main stream of those of "hardcore" members of the party. Man, Revenge of the Sith is on TV right now, it's making it very hard to focus. Voters may find it progressively more difficult to stick solely to one party or group, as the ideas and opinions of that particular group are changing, and kind of drifting apart from their original and "normal" beliefs. I feel like I'm not making sense.
ReplyDeleteThe "Tea Party" that is going on right now is changing politics in general, with more of an emphasis on the republic party. The whole idea behind the Tea Party movement that is occurring right now is to return this nation back to a simpler time, where our government was more united, rather than somewhat disjointed as it is now, as it is no secret that our current state of government is very weak. They are doing this through odd claims, as the aforementioned Obama not being a US citizen. Wasn't he from Hawaii or something? I don't know.
Also, how does General Grievous have a cough? Isn't he a robot?
Voters can’t rely on the party label. Party labels and ideals change with the times and ideals of society, and sometimes the labels change depending upon who is explaining them. Whether or not voters are supposed to make informed decisions depends upon who you ask. Theoretically, government functions best and most efficiently if everyone is informed, which should be motive enough for everyone to educate themselves. However, if every single voter was fully informed about every policy, opinion, tendency, or character trait of all the politicians, there might be a revolution in which all politicians were tarred and feathered and we started over, this time with a batch of more honest, less crooked politicians. Perhaps even ones who cared about something other than reelection. Anyway, voters are supposed to identify with the candidates through ads, campaign materials, and speeches. Realistically, people are not informed, and oftentimes either vote for or against a candidate because someone they know backs that candidate, or people vote by picking the faces next to the names. The roles of third/minority parties are not to win the election. Instead, their purpose is to force majority party candidates to adjust their views (to avoid losing voters) or to draw just enough voters away from one majority party to allow the other to win. All politics ARE local, and if we had a direct democracy, these shifting party alliances would really be a problem. However, since we elect people to represent us, it is ok for a party to vary its ideas in each locality. The party may try to garner votes for its own members, but in the end, it is the individual that gets elected who votes for the people. Therefore, if the people of Arizona elect someone who matches their political values fairly closely, it doesn’t really matter if the person is a Tea Partier (member of the Tea Party?) or not, because the entire Tea Party doesn’t get into the voting booth, just the elected official. On a side note of questionable relevance, I thought it was really cool that there is actually an organization for measuring the flip-flops of candidates’ campaign views (Politifacts Florida). I think there should be a lot more of those, all around America. Maybe if people realized just how much politicians switch sides to get votes, they would be more informed voters.
ReplyDelete@Richie- you had a great point about the purpose of the Tea Party!
ReplyDeleteGeneral Grievous is half machine, half flesh-thing. (http://www.starwars.com/databank/character/generalgrievous/) And he deserves to have a cough because he’s cruel. :)
@Stackhouse- I loved your point about some of the Tea Party’s comments. Those comments will be the political death of the party, because in this age of political correctness, anything that could be even remotely deemed racist or sexist will drive away the crucial stream of voters.
It's becoming more and more difficult for voters to identify with candidates. No matter what political party they are in. It seems as if they keep changing their views on many subjects which makes it harder for voters to better identify with candidates. Therefore voters have a tough time making informed decisions on most candidates. Voters can’t even rely on the party label because the change of views in parties absolutely changes the meanings of the parties and their label. The party label has very little meaning. Voters have to concentrate more on the issues they want resolved than the party that they feel is the best for them.
ReplyDeleteThe tea party’s role in America is trying to have the federal government do as least as possible for the people. The Tea Party in all wants America to go back into the past and be like the government it was in the beginning of America, more unified government and more relaxed government. The Tea Party solidifies the remarks that the Republican Party has to better help them show that their ideals are better than the Democrats. Although how the Tea Party has been acting these couple of months, it is hurting the Republican Party by making them seem more radical and racial with the things the Tea Party says.
voters couls find ways to find canidates by researching what canidates bring to the table and if they are up to their standards. Sadly, people more and more are not thinking for themselves in this country making the political races here, who can brainwash the most people ,get their votes, and grab their seat, and then sadly find themsleves at a loss. However, their are canidates out their that want to help this nation and should be in office. However, they are the ones that dont have the bucks like some people.... Jeff Greene down in the M.I.A. Party labels are the easy ways or the condensed ways of showing what each party holds and those cant be relied on as well. They are to board and only show what they want, they dont mean it will happen. The people will find themselves at a loss when they dont think for themselves, look at mis leading party labels, and vote for the WRONG man for the job. it always has to be about power.......:(
ReplyDeletei believe that the role of the Tea party is to bring yet another change or how Rubio says and alternate to the people in a national party the Republicans. I think the role that they fullfill is getting the people to see what tea partiers believe in, and then come to generalize that they are Republicans, in a national party view. i also think they pick a party based on the grand scheme of the nation's problems and which one can solve the most problems. since the people are looking for a loose government, poeple can rush to the tea partiers, and chant and shout for limited government, but only see little of the whole parties ideals. i think that the tea party brings new information of the people to the Republican party. For an example in Arizona election with McCain, he used the tea party ideals, (which is gaining memebers by the days) and uses them to change his tactics into getting into office. Ex: hatin on Obama.. which McCain does ALOT. However, this may be a problem that Republican face making them see malittle over powering, and a bit Coo-Coo...
Richie, i also watched star wars over the weekend on spike..... AMAZING!!!!! haha
It has become harder for people to identify with ther candidates, considering many people wish to stay with their party of choice. I feel that if people wish to make a good decision, they need to avoid the party label and listen to what the candidates points are. Especially nowadays, when so many candidates viewpoints shift. For this reason its in the best interest of the voter to listen to the candidates ideas and then go from there.
ReplyDeleteThe Tea Party is trying to get the nation back to the way it was, with a more unified and less involved government. Though the Tea Party is brnging more people to it, its also hurting the Republicans through some of its radical and racial actions. As I believe a few stated above, they made the comment that Obama was from a different country, which many viewed as a racial comment. Due to actions like this the Republicans are gaining a bad rep. in some people's eyes because of their association to the Tea Party.
Most people vote for a certain candidate because they are used to voting for that particular party. A lot of people throughout the country, when it comes to elections, do not truly care about the person they are voting for. People should really take consideration in finding out more about the candidates so that they know what they are getting themselves into. There are many ways to find out more information about the candidates such as television, newspapers and the internet. A lot of people vote for a specific person just because they are Republican or Democratic, but those are just titles. If people took the time to listen to what the other party has to say there is a chance that they will like what they have to say better and vote for them. There are people who tend to become more independent though because they are not pleased with either party. As proven in the Washington Post and Fox News articles, the wealthier candidate tends to always have the upper hand. This is because some candidates have more money to invest in campaigning and getting the word out to the voters. For example, McCain spent $20 million on his campaign while Hayworth only spent $3 million and McCain won because he had the resources to make him known to the public. People shouldn’t base their opinions off of the fact that one candidate got more publicity but more one what he has to say.
ReplyDeleteThe “Tea Party” is really just a branch off of the Republican Party and is made up of Radical Conservatives. Sometimes parties have arguments within themselves and result in parties such as the Tea Party. In the end having more parties really only makes it more confusing to the people when it comes to voting though because now they are unsure what that party consists of.
In order for voters to make informed decisions, they must research a candidate, their views, and how likely they are to change their views as the election process is going on. Organizations like Politifact Florida, which measures the flip-flops that candidates make as the election season approaches, enable people to possibly predict candidates evolving views. Voters must see how radically their views change in order to ensure that their candidate is the best possible choice. The only way, I believe, that a voter can identify with candidates is to see their views and determine whether they support them or not. Being a republican or democrat does not mean that you will agree with their views, because, like these articles are showing, parties like the Tea Party are considered “republican” yet can be radically different.
ReplyDeleteParty label, I think, means a basis or foundation of views. For example, supposedly republicans believe in less government, and democrats believe in more government. All other views, however, can be completely different. Party label is not reliable anymore because of the constant evolving of views, as the video on MSNBC “Tea Party Debate” showed of the candidates running for the senate seats. Republican can mean many different views now, as shown by the candidates running that are affiliated with the Tea Party (for example, Marco Rubio).
When asked about the role of the Tea Party, Dick Armey, former House Majority Leader, explained that their goal is to create smaller government, and like Jessica said, obtain fiscal responsibility (earning more than you spend). http://politics.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2010/09/02/dick-armey-explains-the-tea-party-movement.html I think that the role of the Tea Party is to create an alternative for voters, something that is not Republican or Democratic. Supposedly, the goal of the Tea Party is to steer America back towards the ideas of when Reagan was President. One major proponent of the Tea Party currently, like Dick Armey said in the MSNBC “Tea Party Debate,” is that the government is getting too involved now in social security and healthcare. As for what the Tea Party is doing for republicans…it can be seen as negative or positive. Negatively, the Tea Party, with its controversial views, may be scaring conservative voters towards the other side. Positively, however, it gives an alternative to voting strictly Republican or Democratic.
Voters find it more difficult to identify with candidates as candidate nowadays are constantly changing their policies to attract more voters. In order to make an educated vote, citizens must do some reasearch and find the candidate that will best promote their beliefs. Picking either a democrat or republican is simply not enough. Voters have the right to know who there voting for. Party labels still have a significant meaning but they should not be the main influence in a person's vote. Candidates for both sides often differ from the sole values of the party and create a campaign that fits their personal beliefs as oppossed to their party's beliefs.
ReplyDeleteThe tea party is a group of radicial conservatives who are giving republicans a bad name. They want a weak central government where businesses and monopolies can rule. They support the rich and feel no regard for the poor. The Tea Party is trouble because they gain members from the Rebulican party which makes the Republicans more weak. Without numbers, Democrats will stay in power as the Republican party is virtually split in two. Moreover,the Tea Party is giving Republicans a bad name as others associate the radical actions of the party with the Republicans.
The best way (which is not the easiest way) voters can identify themselves with the beliefs of the candidates and make informed decisions is to research the candidate using material that are not biased (most information based on candidates and policies are on sided) and understand which policies their actions might affect and what might happen if they are elected.
ReplyDeleteVoters may never rely on a party label, we should remember that candidates may be in the party but may not necessarily follow all of the ambitions the party wants to accomplish. For example, in the New York Times article that discusses Mark Rubio's sudden change of beliefs, the writer describes Rubio as Tea Party candidate but a candidate who wants “to turn his candidacy into one built more on ideas than outrage.” The writer, Jeff Zeleny, also explains that Rubio does not agree with all Republican ideas such as SB 1070, and disrespecting President Obama, who Rubio respects as an individual but disagrees with his politics.
Today the Party Label means everything to voters. For example, if policies are known as liberal they are immediately thought of policies that were supported by Democrats. Unfortunately the characteristics that make a party do not really reflect the characteristics of the candidates under that party. For example, the Fox News, informs us that Charlie Crist is running as an independent but the NY Times article explains that Crist is really a Republican but became an Independent for the sole reason that the competition he was experiencing as a Republican was overwhelming. This does not necessarily mean that Crist will be a candidate who will support both Republican and Democratic ideals equally, it just means that Crist will still be conservative but will support some Democratic policies.
The role of the Tea Party is expressed in the MSNBC video, the Tea Party is driven by the question of if the role of the government is part of problem or part of the solution.
Even though issues may diverse throughout states, candidates pick a party through beliefs that are common with other candidates that are in a party. For example, the issue of illegal immigration is a common issue and the parties will have two different solutions on how to deal with the problem.
In my opinion the controversial ideas Tea Party candidates suggest brings attention to the Republican Party. It is the increased attention that might give Republicans the majority in Congress.
A voter can not simply rely on a label. In order to be sure that a decision is intellectual, a voter must do their research. Having an open mind and viewing everything from every perspective or point of view is the only way to be effective. A voter must make their decisions on how it will effect their future and what is best for the country as a whole.
ReplyDeleteLabels are very broad and they all base their ideas around one idea. Choosing a label is fine, but sticking with it can be a mistake.
This is by Jessica Schildt.
ReplyDeleteThe Tea Party movement is a modern example of the behavior and beliefs of humans during times of crisis. As a grassroots movement, the Tea Party Patriots derive their beliefs from the people who believe that both parties need to reform their ways in order to save this nation (--). While the core values of the Tea Party align with those of conservatives and Libertarians, the members of this movement are adamant about advocating change in both major parties; Tea Party members come from a wide spectrum of political beliefs.
This established, it is also important to remember that in any election, stalwart Republicans often vote for Republican candidates and stalwart Democrats often vote for Democratic candidates. Thus, the moderates and independents are often the deciding factor.
Some believe that it is exactly these moderates and independents that the Tea Party wants to appeal to. Whether or not this is the case, the evolution of the Tea Party will be documented as very significant in our nation’s history because it is reminiscent of the Revolutionaries- people opposing the actions that outraged them and demanding change.
The rise of the Tea Party has raised some valuable questions about parties and the candidates that represent them:
How are voters supposed to identify with candidates and make informed decisions?
The surest way of becoming an informed voter is to earn an education- to learn about our country’s history in the most objective way possible. By learning about political parties that have been created, changed, and faded out, we get a better idea of what is feasible in the future. Knowledge of our history helps us predict future trends. This is not a foolproof method, because there are always going to be some teachers (or perhaps other students) who abandon objectivity and try to distort the facts; however, a sound education is still the best tool a citizen can wield in the political process.
The David Gregory interview shows another step that voters must take in order to stay informed and alert. Candidates use rhetoric (especially irrelevancies) to gain the trust of voters, many of whom believe a platform without proof or reason. Look for candidates who use historic examples (correctly, without skewing the facts) in abundance. With rhetoric, candidates are free to sway the voter in any direction, but with historic fact, a voter can better visualize the candidate’s platform. The lesson here is to be aware of these occurrences, as most candidates are unquestionably intent upon obtaining votes- in any way possible.
Continued in next comment.
Continued from previous comment.
ReplyDeleteCan voters rely on the party label? Does the party label mean anything?
The Washington post article offers a very intriguing thought: that “establishment candidates can prosper in this year of the outsider.” There is a distinct trend this year among voters to stick with the party label, especially on the Republican side. It seems that voters are much more comfortable voting for a platform that is familiar to them than one that is brand-new. One example is McCain’s victory over Tea Party candidate JD Hayworth; although McCain often adjusts his beliefs on issues, he won this primary by grabbing hold of the vital issues, taking a position on those, and not changing that position. Another example, delivered by the Fox News article, is that of Scott and McCollum, the former “running on an anti-establishment platform” and the latter being a candidate from an established party. Scott “now trails McCollum by nearly 10 points.” Again, in a time of crisis, voters want change, and they are less inclined to rely on change from a party that is itself still developing (such as the Tea Party). Some of this can be attributed not to the specific beliefs of the parties (all three) but to human nature; when given the choice, voters are choosing the candidates whose platforms they can trust.
What is the role of the Tea Party? What do the Tea Partiers give to the Republican Party?
This question has many aspects, only a few of which reasonably fit into the scope of this blog post.
The Tea Party’s role is viewed differently depending upon how one perceives the movement. Some believe that the movement is a response to the predicament of this nation. Those who are members of the Tea Party will declare that they believe in reform in both parties, and that they are truly offering an alternative to the established parties’ platforms. Both perceptions support the idea that the Tea Party’s role is to alert America of growing belief in fiscally conservative principles (which are the core of the movement, according to its official website). The Tea Party allows those who do not identify with the established parties to join a movement that expresses alternative ideas. Again, independent and moderate voters are often the deciding factor in elections (due to party loyalties); this considered, the role of the Tea Party is to offer different solutions to the problems that are plaguing the nation at present.
The Founding Fathers never said this would be easy. While our election process is widely considered to be the best in the world, it still allows for error and foolishness, and it is not without its drawbacks. However, the freedoms that we have to separate from an established party and create a new movement are still intact. The Tea Party illustrates this above all. No matter how difficult it may be to see desired change, we should be grateful for the fact that we are so involved in our government. Participating in our political process requires a leap of faith- in the candidates, in one’s fellow citizens, and in this great system itself.
Nowadays it can be said that it is easier for a voter to "connect" with a candidate because of the advances in widespread communication like the internet. They can use these larger bases of knowledge to make the most informed decisions they could under the circumstances. However, this still in no way fosters a true relationship between representative and voter, something that has been largely lost to time as America expanded. In general, a voter will just go with their party as a result, taking into account whatever key points a candidate has released to the media at large. These party labels can be effective to some extent, as they indicate a general set of ideas, but candidates can differ extensively on the specifics of issues or how to handle them, so a party label should be trusted carefully; as mentioned, they can only offer a general ideology that could be quite different in its actual execution. The Tea Party is something of a third party, an extension of republican ideas to a greater extreme than the norm. Were they to go out on their own ticket, they would split the Republican votes just like the Bull Moose party did (their ideas are too similar for one to do far better than the other, so a meanwhile unified Democratic opposition will easily overtake them both). But if they add their ideas to the Republican party at large, like many "third" parties do (like when Williams Jenning Bryan and the Populists added their idea of the coinage of silver to the Democrats), they have a chance of expanding that party's votes by offering representation to a larger scope of voters. The Tea Party offers this to the Republican party, as more extremeists who may have been unwilling to vote or would have voted for a third party that couldn't win might now give their vote to the Republicans as they feel their beliefs would be represented at least to some extent there. Similarly, despite the issues at a local level being diverse and different between each area, there are common themes to which most issues adhere, boiling down to things like fed vs. state rights, or economic policy. In that sense, a voter will choose a party that they feel can represent their opinions on these issues in general no matter the more intricate details.
ReplyDeleteTo make informed decisions, voters should be sure to look at all sides of an issue and make an effort to truly understand the positions of the candidates on said issue. It is best to try to get a feel for a candidate and their overall attitude concerning a problem. Also, looking at a candidate's past history in terms of voting and government positions, if any, will assist an individual in finding a candidate that shares the same ideals and will do what the individual believes is best for the country. Party label does mean something when concerned with the beliefs of a party, however the party itself generally encompasses a wide range of individuals with different values and beliefs that range from moderate to extremist. Some noticeable ideals do occur commonly in certain parties. The tea party is an example of a party that could possibly influence the Republican Party or even cause realignment within it. The Bull Moose and Progressive were parties that changed certain beliefs within larger political parties. The tea party is able to function throughout many states because of its broad beliefs that many individuals can relate to in various ways, and it also gives the Republicans a chance to possibly absorb some of the beliefs of the minority party. The absorption of minor parties into the two-party system is how the two parties throughout time have evolved in their opinions and ideals.
ReplyDelete@ Erin- Your statement regarding party labels is very insighful. I agree with you when you write that people's votes change based upon perceptions of a party. The candidates for the party have an enormous role, as they shape the voter's idea of that particular party. Our minds associate these people with their party, and the danger is that we will begin to vote solely for the candidates as opposed to voting for the beliefs of the party.
ReplyDelete@ Max- I agree with your analysis of the Tea Party's beliefs. This movement seeks to return to the principles of the Founding Fathers- limited government involvement (not to be confused with zero government involvement). However, I struggle to believe that there is sound proof to support your last sentence regarding the Tea Party's impact upon the Republican party. Why do you believe that this movement is detrimental to the established party? It could be very helpful; for example, if a Republican candidate wins over a Tea Party candidate in the primaries, then the voters who would've supported the Tea Party candidate will likely vote for the Republican candidate because, in the end, that party's principles are closer to the principles of the Tea Party.
On a side note, I wonder what proof exists to support the claim that the Tea Party is racist.
@ Vaibhav- Your last statement is intriguing. I never considered the fact that the Tea Party is drawing more attention to the Republican Party and that this attention could help the latter.
ReplyDeleteWell, I originally posted some huge comment. But for some odd reason, it got deleted.
ReplyDeleteSo...anyway!
Voters can't really identify with their candidate based on party anymore. So many politicians say things to swing a vote that you can't really even trust what they say. Personally, it seems to me that you can't listen to ANYTHING that ANYBODY says anymore. You need to do the research yourself in order to find out what exactly a candidate has done in the realm of politics. Conservatives are starting to make decisions based on what voters want not what their party label describes. Rocking the Independent status is the way to go because you can vote for the people you feel good about without worrying about party label.
The tea party, like many said before me, are basically in the game to try and get the government back to being more conservative and such as it used to be or as it was defined by the constitution. Also, the radical actions they are taking now-a-days just make them seem attention deprived.
For a person to truly become informed about their canidates, they must take it into their own hands to research their background, past voting records and other information to make informed votes. People cannot rely on the ads or newscasts they see because they are all biased and sometimes mis-informed. People also cannot simply rely on party titles anymore if they are only voting by party. It is common now for canidates to have views conflicting with those of their party. Depending on the issue and it's importance to the individual, it could completely change their vote. Overall, it is the people's responsibility to inform themselves about whothey are voting for.
ReplyDeleteThe Tea Party is an overall response to the political platform already in place. It offers alternative ideas to those who cannot find a place within either developed parties. As Marco Rubio stated, the Tea Party is trying to "create an alternative." Because the movement is so new however, many canidates have been straying from any affiliation with it. John McCain for example had Sarah Palin verify for everyone that McCain is a conservative republican and is not a member of the Tea Party. In times of hard crisis like the nation seems to be in ( mostly economical) it seems like the people would rather stand behind a party that is already strongly developed.
Voters can identify with candidates by researching their views on different topics and deciding whether or not they agree with the candidates’ stance on an issue. In order to make informed decisions, voters must know the candidates’ previous positions regarding issues and know if they change their views and how often that occurs.
ReplyDeleteA party's label can not be relied on. As shown in the MSNBC video, some of the Tea Party candidates had views that are radical compared to the mainstream ideas. Different factions of the Republican Party including the Tea Party and Libertarians typically have the same ideologies; however, some views vary slightly while others can be extreme. Labels identify the general views of the party as a whole, but they differ between members and factions.
The role of the Tea Party is to represent the people of the Republican Party that have slightly different views. They are simply a split-off of the main party, they follow the same basic platform, but with minor variations in their beliefs. They are seen as both positive and negative due to their differing beliefs.
One of the biggest problems that voters have when deciding on what candidate and party they should support is that hardly anyone completely agrees with one party or one candidate. A lot of people find it difficult to be faithful to one party because not everything that party stands for isn't always what you stand for. For example if someone is fiscally conservative but socially liberal they will find it hard to decide which side to vote for, because no matter what they are sacrificing something that they believe. Especially in todays media driven world people need to research everything about a candidate from multiple media sources and try to find the least of the corrupted. No one should go into an election blindly and just vote for someone who shares the same party as you. Party lines are becoming so confusing and fuzzy that people are having difficulties identifying with one. Throughout history our parties have evolved and all together changed multiple times but we have had the same two parties for about eighty years. I think that with in a few more election cycles our party lines will be redrawn to accommodate voters current beliefs. The Tea Party movement may just be the beginning of the two party system revolution. They are playing a very important role in todays politics and eventually may become one of the main parties in America. As to what the Tea Party gives to the Republican party its beliefs may be adopted by the general Republican party to boost the success of both.
ReplyDeleteAs time has progressed, the connection between voter and candidate has decreased. Because of this voters have turned to voting for their party instead of voting for a candidate. Most voters may tune-in to mass medias such as TV and the internet, which candidates use to push their major viewpoints, but these sources do not allow the voter to acquire a deep understanding of the candidates political views and strategies. Also, candidates may only offer one side of the issue and the voter may never see the full issue. Therefore, voters are only able to make partially informed decisions about the candidates that they vote for and cannot rely on party labels to cast educated votes.
ReplyDeleteParty labels offer a somewhat effective avenue for voters because they define a general political ideology. But the insertion of a third party, branching off of the republican party, would split votes among the party. The Tea Party's extreme conservative views only hurt the republican party by taking overall votes. This can be compared to the Bull Moose Party, which also split a party in two based on their more extreme views. A unified democratic voter body will easily overcome that of a split republican party.
The Tea Party would be able to contribute a larger pool of voters, attracted by their more extreme views, to the republican party if they two parties chose to unify their ideologies. By doing so, the republican party would have a stronger following against that of the democrats during elections. Also, this would allow voters to more willingly rely on party voting because they would feel more secure knowing that, despite the small details, the politicians they vote for are fully capable of handling the situation at hand.
The parties help to guide voters to the representatives that are more likely to have the same fundamental beliefs as them. They are a coarse guide for the people to allow them to sort through the candidates faster. Once they chose a party, they can sort through each individual who is a member of that party running. They find the candidate that has the closest views by checking news stories, by watching debates, or by even following them on twitter and youtube. The people feel closer to the candidates with the last two because they can get constant updates that aren't often in political terms (more often laymens terms) and it is a more personal relationship. People not only make thier decisions from the politics being discussed, but they also have to like the politition (as a person)who is debating the politics. They become in the nominee's personal life and create a bond that connects them to the nominee in a closer bond than just voter-to-congressman. They feel they are more involved in the debate and more involved in the politition's decisions and actions.
ReplyDeleteThe tea parties serve as a way for polititions to come together and oppose what the government is doing now. They can twist it to any angle they want because they can oppose any major topic they want to zero-in on. Once a few voters gain knowledge, they start to join tea-party movements. They tell friends and family and before long there are so many people involved that it actually makes a statement. It is just a clever way for the polititions to say they don't like what the government is doing right now. It gains popularity fairly quickly and it also makes the people subconsiously think of liberation from Britain and how we overcame all of that. The tea-parties generally have a positive connotation with them, making it easier to join.
With the huge influence made by the two main political parties in America, independents have to make a big impact to get the same type of recognition. Their endorsements are not at the same level as the Republican and Democrat, because their parties is smaller, more intimate. A new party breaking out into a major part of our politcal system would take much time, effort, and skill in endorsing a fitting candidate. Educated voters should be aware of all the repercusions of their vote and in the biased media portrayal of candidates they must really pay attention to the key facts. In choosing a member from a Tea Party group they must go more out of their way to become associated with the ideologies of the party, due to its smaller role in elections, but what is now small may end up changing the face of politics, such as the progressive party in 1900's. Parties have changed continually within America's existence eventually turning into our two main parties today. There is always room for growth and change and that is in the people's vote.
ReplyDeleteA voters decision is usually biased on thier preferred party. Canidates are doing everything they can throughtout the media and the public to "make a connection" with voters. Technology has established a new way of connecting and discussing politics. Based on thier newfound knowledge, they are able to make a decision on who they believe is the best canidate. No voter can rely on a prty label. Just because a canidate is involved in their preferrred party doesn't mean they have the same ideals, beliefs, or opinions on matters. A voter is going to vote for who they believe best matches their views. The Tea Party firmly believes in the original government established hundreds of years ago and are willing to fight and campaign against this contemperary way of dealing with politics. The Republican Party is definitely more stricter than other parties such as the Democratic Party and are obviously going to side and support the party more closely related to theirs determined to "change" the government.
ReplyDeleteWhen we are about to vote for a candidate us as voters need to gather all the information about the candidate as possible whether it's from the internet or the news on TV because all news nowadays is coming from a certain perspective whether it be a Democrat or a Republican so voters never really can know what a voter truly stands for.
ReplyDeleteVoters can rely on their party label to a point but that can't be their sole factor when choosing a candiate for office because there are some candidates who sometimes don't fit the stereotypical "Republican" or "Democrat, for example Arnold Schwarzzeneger who over his years as the governor of California as one of the more Liberal Republicans instead of a usual Conservative.
If the Tea Party wants their beliefs to be accomplished they all need to have the same beliefs across the nation regardless whether the issues differ from state to state or they will not be united and from everyone else's perspective be seen just as disjointed as the Tea Party sees the government
@ Jessica
ReplyDeleteIt is very true when you say that a sound education comes in handy when voting. Knowing the basic history of each party gives you a little bit more incite as to what to expect from that party and either prevents you from making a poor decision or one that will take our country far. Not very many people consider doing extra research and I think that more people should. By knowing more about each party perhaps better decisions will be made, in turn keeping our country from starting or getting into any more problems than we have. Not too mention that there is a better chance that the problems we are already facing will be dealt with and resolved. It really depends on what people want and are willing to go through and based upon that people will make the decision to go the extra mile and do a little more research.
@PG
ReplyDeleteWe think similar. Are you sure we aren't twins? Quick, what's your last name? But seriously, we do, like with the whole republican thing, and somewhat in the Tea Party department, with your opinion sounding more correct then mine. And it got me interested in how they plan on really spreading their ideas around the nation, as they do need most of the state's votes to actually solidify their foundation. Did that make sense? I think it did.
@Erin
General Grievous is half machine half human? Seriously? I thought he was just full on robot. My mind is pretty blown right now. I'm also glad we share most of the same ideas regarding the Tea Party, it gives me a sense like I actually know what I'm talking about, and don't sound like an idiot.
@ Jessica Schildt:
ReplyDeleteWhen you refer to Senator McCain winning the Arizona primary against Tea Party candidate JD Hayworth, you only mention McCain changing his belief to what voters believe are the most important issues. But we should remember that McCain also won the primary using millions of dollars to embarrass JD Hayworth using the well known advertisement stating that government gave away free money and bringing up his connection with Jack Abramoff. McCain was also smart to protect himself after losing the 2008 Presidential election where many believe that he correctly predicted that his run for Senate would hit a few road bumps, and due to the foresight he took the correct safety measures to protect himself from other candidates who could compete against him.
It is through a combination of foresight, and strategy that McCain won the Arizona primary.
@Rick
ReplyDeleteI agree with you in your argument that party labels provide a general idea about what the politition belonging to that party stands for, but that parties are so broad, people need to delve deeper into the politics to chose a candidate that they identify well with. Also, I like how you analyzed the tea-party as a third party, that connected to the Republican party allows to more connection to third party voters.
@taylor
You're right about how voters have to really choose the lesser of the evils when looking for a party to belong to, or a representative to vote for. No one has the exact same beliefs as anyone, and it may seem like this would cause for a lot of disagreement, so much that nothing would get done, but people prioritize what is most important to them and come to an agreement on the best representative for them.
@DLackey11- You have a very true point about how people vote; I think politicians try to take advantage of the fact that most people are ill-informed. Great point about the amount of money spent on the campaigns – good example to go with it!
ReplyDelete@Joe- I’m not sure if I agree with your statement that the Tea Party people don’t care about the poor, but I like your point about Republicans becoming weaker because they are split up.
@Jessica- You had an excellent point about how important knowledge of history is when deciding who to vote for. I agree with you about voters voting for just one candidate rather than the ideals of the entire party. Party ideals do play a huge role in the votes and policies of candidates, but sometimes a candidate can just stick to his/her own agenda rather than vote as they were chosen to vote.
@Rick- The internet does play a huge role in choosing a candidate today; not only can a voter read all the propaganda and some of the truth, but they can also chat with one another in order to help make an informed decision that stands up to argument.
@Richie- I am not exactly the most politically informed person…I just like watching politicians fight over policies because the fighting is all that is keeping them from ruling the world.
“A twisted melding of flesh and metal, General Grievous' body is a deadly weapon forged by the cutting edge developers of the Confederacy. Grievous' living matter was encased within his precision-engineered artificial body; inside the hardened carapace beat the heart of a remorseless killer. A pressurized gut-sack held his vital organs, while his skull-like mask contained his living eyes and brain. Making the horrific amalgam more unpleasant was a persistent wet, hacking cough coming from his ravaged lungs.” (directly from a website) So no, he’s not exactly half human. But he is entirely creepy.
@B-Laq
ReplyDeleteAt this moment, with how turbulent and ever changing the political system and overall political ideology is, do you really think that a "united" democratic party will be stronger than the split republicans, especially with the discontent that is felt due to the current administration?
@Taylor-
I like what you said about how you believe that ideologies will start realigning after the next few elections. I haven't thought about that before, and I thought that was some interesting insight.
@Pg: I partially agree with your statement, "...voters need to gather all the information about the candidate as possible whether it's from the internet or the news on TV...". The reason I agree is because, yes as a voter we should feel obligated to research the candidates in order to make an informed decision. The only thing that I think you left out of your statement is that the voter of course needs to gain info from internet, news, tv, etc. But the voter needs to make sure the sources are credible and needs to be able to factor out what's fact and what's opinion. The voter should also take the time to look at both parties to make a solid conclusion before making a vote.
ReplyDelete@Ryan Driscoll: "...you can't listen to ANYTHING that ANYBODY says anymore. You need to do the research yourself...". Definately could not agree more with this statement! It's like what I was saying to Pg, you really cant trust media, because to many opinions get mixed into the facts making it difficult to sort out right from wrong. This is why (like you said) the only way to make the right, informed decision is to do your own background research.
@ Torchia:
ReplyDeleteI agree with your opinion that the differences between candidates and politicians is what keeps the U.S. government away from majority rule, and I am sure Madison agrees with you too.
@ Chris Hulse:
Chris, I agree with your point that voters need to ensure that the resources they use have to be credible. I also agree that voters need to understand the fluff from the fact, unfortunately most material that talk about candidates are biased which influences many citizens to whom they want for the certain position. Your solution of background research is the only solution that may give voters unbiased material, but like I wrote before most resources are biased so researching information about candidates, and policies will probably take a very long time. This reason is why I believe many voters just believe the opinions of others because they simply do not have the time to research each politician and the reforms they support.
p.s. In my first post…when I was talking about what JESSICA said, I meant Stackhouse haha. My bad.
ReplyDelete@Brendon: You’re completely right in looking at a candidate’s past voting. You can’t ensure that they will completely have their views cemented – they might change along with the election season (it’s all about public image!). Also, when you mentioned how party label is a wide range of beliefs of individuals, I completely agree with this. Party label does mean diversity in views, yet there is still a basis of beliefs in which they stand on.
@Etorchia: Like I mentioned in my post, you said that the roles of minor parties are not to win the election, but to force the other candidates to change their views. This is true in that candidates will change, harden, or soften their views on particular subjects according to what public opinion is…the big question is: What views are most popular among Americans so that I can gain the most votes possible? Likewise, voters need to make informed decisions. Just because Oprah backs Obama doesn’t mean he’s the best candidate possible. Media, news, radio, etc. taints people’s views on politics nowadays and it really is important to be properly informed without biased media.
@ Ashley
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on the fact that voters can not always rely on party labels to pick their candidate that they most admire. Sometimes the candidates have different opinions from their party and that is why taking the time to listen to each candidate is important. A voter could decide to vote for the candidate of the party they least admire based upon what that candidate has to say. Regarding the Republican Party, the Republicans are known to be more conservative about their morals and because of this the Democrats as well as the media (the media being liberal), nail the Republicans to the wall whenever they make a mistake. The Republicans have less government influence in our lives, while the Democratic Party is all about government involvement and higher taxes. As mentioned before, the Republican Party is not necessarily stricter but just more conservative.
@ Rick: I agree that voters can find a much easier connection with candidates nowadays. Such as through the use of Youtube, which played a significant role in the election of President Obama. I also agree that the Tea Party will effectively split votes away from the republican party, making is easier for the democratic party to gather the majority.
ReplyDelete@Brendon: I agree that voters have a responsibility to understand candidates and their views from all angles. This is paramount to make intelligent decisions that will better the country. I also agree that the Tea Party has a broader ideology and therefore may be able to "absorb" more voters into the republican party. However, these votes will detract from the Republican party itself unless the two parties conjoin.
So today in my sociology class some light was shed on the current state of our political parties. I must give some credit to Ms. Brunk for some of the items brought up relating to the blog topic on hand. One of these points being that with the current state of discontent in our political system due to presidency, many democrats running in the reelection this November are requesting that Obama not accompany them on their campaign due to the negative effect his image may have on some voters. They are worried that he is shaming the democratic face. And in this I can relate it to what Vaibhav is saying (gosh that post took FOREVER TO FIND.)
ReplyDeleteVaibhav: So you brought up how Charlie Crist is running as an independent to avoid the competition he gets in running alongside his fellow republicans. This shows how little a party label means. These Democrats worried about getting reelected due to their party's political affiliation with Obama would possibly benefit from changing their political affiliation from "democratic" to "independent", but retaining their same view points. The name "democratic" or "republican" is more of a general term than a description of someone's entire politcal view point, so "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." - Shakespeare. (Sorry, I had to go there.)
And another point brought up by my sociology class: Hillary Clinton recently disrespected Obama, a member of her own democratic party, by calling his administration weak. This brings up suspicions that she may be planning to run against him in the next presidential election. If so, that would make the election: Democrat vs. Democrat. Everyone knows that Hillary Clinton's view points are democratic, but it might best benefit her to state her political affiliation as independent just to avoid the negative connotation that Democratic politicians have earned under the upset of the current administation. Just a thought.
P.S. Clinton endorsed Obama for the presidency after her running in the presidential election ended...my, my how things have changed.
ReplyDelete@Sam
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you said about people needing to research the candidates for themselves instead of relying on the media for their information. All of the media is biased to some extent and people need to get back to reading the laws for themselves so that they are getting the correct information and not a watered down version of it.
@Pg
What you said about people not fitting into either the stereotypical Republican or Democrat party is true. People shouldn't have to put all of themselves into a box and label it either Republican or Democrat.
Taylor, your points on problems associated with allying with a party make a lot of sense. It's true that only so much faith can be put in a specific party because you will have to sacrifice something to join with them.
ReplyDeleteAlana, your comments on the independent party were also very insightful, like how in order to make any impact they have to try much harder as a third party. I'd say this stems from their unwillingness to join with one of the two major parties like most third parties (Tea Party included) do.
@Rick
ReplyDeleteI agree with your comments concerning communication as a form of linkage between citizen and politician. Because of this, there is a great amount of disconnect, and the voter might not feel as though his/her interests are taken into account. In the past, even the president would go to various
cities and campaign and speak to various individuals on a much more personal scale.
@etorchia
I disagree with your comment concerning the fact that minority parties are not trying to win the election. I believe you are being too general when it comes to this issue. Ralph Nader is a prime example of this, running four times in his political career for president. One must realize that some minority party candidates genuinely strive to earn a position.
@PG
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you said about the tea party having a stronger backing if they could all seem to unify their basic principles. It seems like the party is one that some polititians wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole because of how scrambled the canidate's viewpoints are. We know that they are more extreme republicans, but what are some of there basic principles that they can all agree on?
@Alanah
I agree with what you said about politics always changing. New political groups and parties have sprung up all throughout history and they were mostly in reaction to something that they felt that the existing power was doing wrong. It isn't like the Whig's lasted forever. We must not look at the Tea Party as a permanent staple in politics. It too, like most other side parties, will pass.
@ Alana Turner:
ReplyDeleteAlana, I agree that the Crist example may defy the power of a party label. But in the Fox News article, the last couple of paragraphs clearly state that Crist might have a difficult gaining support. Crist lost many supporters after he became Independent, but that does not mean that he gained some support. Unfortunately for Crist, the steadfast Democrats and Republicans in Florida will vote for their party candidates.
Ryan...nice try, we all know it did not just randomly get deleted...juuust kidding ;)
ReplyDeleteI agree that people can not believe everything they hear. I heard a while back a saying that went something like this, "believe ten percent of what you hear and fifty percent of what you see", I would have to say I agree. For instance, watching only one news channel is going to get you no where because they all are somewhat biased. In order to truly make a decision you must see everything from all perspectives or point of views, seeing the big picture. In other words, seeing what everyone says, or every news channel, about a certain topic. Of course, even then you can not be positive on what is right or what the truth is, but you will have a much better idea and at that point you can decide for yourself with your own opinion.
Max, I would have to say you bring up another good point. I definitely agree that candidates change their views far too frequently just to basically sucker their voters into supporting them. In the end all that matters is whether or not you are good at lying that determines if you will be chosen. In other words, just because someone receives more votes does not mean they deserve it or will be the best suitor for the job, it simply means they are better at selling their act.
ReplyDelete@Carissa: Your comment on the organization politifact is wonderful (like your face)...anyways, politifact further helps voters test the candidate's credibilty and reinforces how the title of a party holds little importance. If we have an entire organizantion dedicated to the flip flopping it must be a big issue. This adds to my earlier post about the flip flopping and unimportance of political parties when it comes to reelections and the the politians' general viewpoints.
ReplyDeleteResponse to Sam_Sidoti- Some of the things that the Tea Party needs to agree on include putting a limit on government spending, and making a simpler tax reform system that can be interpreted more easily than it is now(http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/tea-party-activists-unveil-contract-america/story?id=10376437&page=1)
ReplyDelete@Taylor- Interesting point you brought up, to me if the person can't always agree with a candidates beliefs, such as being fiscally conservative and socially political as you put it, then each person should choose the person based on the most important points to them . They'll just have to make a decison which as closely as possible relates to their ideals or they risk letting a candidate they don't want to be in office
@Ryan Driscoll- I don't their radical actions make them seem deprived of attention, they are just trying to make a point. It only would seem that if they didn't have that huge of a following but currently the Tea Party has a respectable following in terms of memberships.
Response to Richie Black-Yes we are twins
@ Max- what do you mean by "relaxed" government?
ReplyDelete@ Alana- yes but the same did happen with W Bush too. It is a common trend
@jared who was @Ryan- I agree. Nice try Ryan!!!
Overall still a great discussion! Best of the week is a tie between Erin T and Carissa. Nice work girls.