On Thursday Palin will face the biggest test of her vice-presidential candidacy with the vice-presidential debate, and I am scared. Through her interviews in the past weeks, it has become obvious that Palin does not do well under that type of pressure. She will absolutely have to perform well in this debate in order to still be considered a viable candidate.
This article does not forget to mention her helpless interview with Katie Couric and the Saturday Night Live parody that went along with it. Although I am terribly worried as a Republican, the New York Times could potentially be helping the Republican ticket, if not intentionally. Just as I stated before the first presidential debate, they were lowering expectations for Obama. Could it be that they are trying to criticize Palin, but at the same time unintentionally lowering her expectations? I think so, yes. At the same time, NY Times states that Palin has presented a "question mark" that she will have to entirely erase at the debate and that could prove a very lofty expectation. Not only that but she will have to present herself in a way that does not seem too over rehearsed or scripted.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Sunday, September 28, 2008
This week's wrap-up
The news topics on the New York Times this week focused on this past Friday's debate. The Debate was at the University of Mississippi between McCain and Obama. The news revolved on everything surrounding the debate: who was or wasn't coming, what would be discussed (the designated foreign policy, or the economy), and who would win. Directly after the main debate, there was news titled "the debate" on who won the debate. I believe that the issue is going to shift in the next coming week to the next upcoming debate.
I haven't heard anyone talk about the debate, other than within my Election class. A few friends have mentioned it, but other than that, there was no discussion about it. This could reflect on the perception of importance of the debate. If people do not think that the debates are important, it could change the entire campaign strategies. However, I think that there will be more discussion on how well each candidate did rather than the anticipation of each debate. Overall the top issues being discussed by the NY Times this week were: 1)The Debate 2)McCain's presence at the debate 3)Economy 4)Bush's speech 5)Controversial Ads.
I haven't heard anyone talk about the debate, other than within my Election class. A few friends have mentioned it, but other than that, there was no discussion about it. This could reflect on the perception of importance of the debate. If people do not think that the debates are important, it could change the entire campaign strategies. However, I think that there will be more discussion on how well each candidate did rather than the anticipation of each debate. Overall the top issues being discussed by the NY Times this week were: 1)The Debate 2)McCain's presence at the debate 3)Economy 4)Bush's speech 5)Controversial Ads.
Friday, September 26, 2008
The Debate is on...
Debate or no debate? That was the question all week. The New York Times top story this morning was that Senator John McCain stated that he will participate in the first presidential debate tonight, instead of postponing it to participate in the negotiations of the $700 billion bailout plan. After a flurry of phone calls and rearranging schedules, both senators are expected to arrive at the University of Mississippi this afternoon. There is the continuation of constantly trying to lower viewer expectations. The reason for doing this is: when viewers watch, their satisfaction with that particular candidate can only raise, not disappoint.The main coverage of the article , however, turned into Senator Obama's talk on how he is "optimistic" at the way the Congressional negotiations are going for the bailout of financial institutions. He stated that there has been a lot of real progress that has been made in the recent hours, and it is important to remain calm and just move forward. The McCain statement this morning also stated that he was "optimistic" and stated that there was "significant progress" being made.
However, the NYTimes was quick to point out that this statement was also critical of Obama, portraying him as partisan and not as concerned as McCain. The direct quote:
"The difference between Barack Obama and John McCain was apparent durinig the White House meeting yesterday where Barack Obama's priority was political posturing in his opening monologue defending the package as it stands...McCain listened to all sides so he could help focus the debate on finding a bipartisan resolution that is in the interest of taxpayers and homeowners."
The NY Times was spinning the issue to portray Senator John McCain as a player on the offense. Many times in politics, if a candidate is putting out ads and statements that are critical of his/her opponent it means that they are losing in the polls. The more that the NY Times portrays Obama as the victim in this case, the better chance he has at winning. However, the Obama campaign has to be very careful because if he doesn't do anything, it could look like he is a weak candidate or that he has something to hide.
*Picture was taken by Win McNamee/Getty Images and can be found at: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/27/us/politics/27debatecnd.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Three Days Left
Accessed 9:15pm on September 23
There are three days left until the first debate between Senator Barack Obama and Senator John McCain and the battle is already heated. With the biggest economic crisis since the 1930s, economy is undoubtedly the top topic; however, this Friday's debate will talk about foreign policy, not the economy.
Not surprisingly, the topic being discussed was the upcoming debate. At first glance, the article was giving a lot of credit to McCain. The article noted him as very comfortable when talking about foreign policy. He is considered to be a great speaker and totally in his element when he speaks on this issue particularly. So this is good news for the conservatives, right? Wrong. This is a technique that is used during all presidential debate times. They are setting the expectations so high for McCain, that he can only fall below those expectations, causing his ratings to drop. All credit that was given to McCain is slyly being used against him. There is no doubt that there will be a similar article to this one somewhere in a conservative news source talking about Obama.
There are three days left until the first debate between Senator Barack Obama and Senator John McCain and the battle is already heated. With the biggest economic crisis since the 1930s, economy is undoubtedly the top topic; however, this Friday's debate will talk about foreign policy, not the economy.
Not surprisingly, the topic being discussed was the upcoming debate. At first glance, the article was giving a lot of credit to McCain. The article noted him as very comfortable when talking about foreign policy. He is considered to be a great speaker and totally in his element when he speaks on this issue particularly. So this is good news for the conservatives, right? Wrong. This is a technique that is used during all presidential debate times. They are setting the expectations so high for McCain, that he can only fall below those expectations, causing his ratings to drop. All credit that was given to McCain is slyly being used against him. There is no doubt that there will be a similar article to this one somewhere in a conservative news source talking about Obama.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
From the week of September 15
News topics on the New York Times this week has started to move away from Sarah Palin and towards the importance of the economy in this election. This is easy to understand after the major changes in the financial markets this week. I don't feel that I have read enough from the New York Times to make a decision as to whether I agree with their opinion of the economy and the election.
Teachers, parents, friends and grandparents are definitely talking about the main issues. In every single one of my classes last week, the professors brought up the economy and the effects on politics at least once. There have been a couple of my friends believe that the current economic crisis is the result of failed policies of the Bush Administration and that Barack Obama would be the best candidate if (and when) it comes to the economy. An explanation for the parallel between these friends and news sources is that they are probably getting their news from a source with a similiar agenda to the New York Times.
Overall the top five news issues for The New York Times during the week of September 15-20 were: 1) Economic failures (Merrill Lynch, AIG, etc.) 2) McCain's "fundamentals" 3)Upcoming debates 4)Palin (as always) and 5) Biden's Guns.
Teachers, parents, friends and grandparents are definitely talking about the main issues. In every single one of my classes last week, the professors brought up the economy and the effects on politics at least once. There have been a couple of my friends believe that the current economic crisis is the result of failed policies of the Bush Administration and that Barack Obama would be the best candidate if (and when) it comes to the economy. An explanation for the parallel between these friends and news sources is that they are probably getting their news from a source with a similiar agenda to the New York Times.
Overall the top five news issues for The New York Times during the week of September 15-20 were: 1) Economic failures (Merrill Lynch, AIG, etc.) 2) McCain's "fundamentals" 3)Upcoming debates 4)Palin (as always) and 5) Biden's Guns.
Friday, September 19, 2008
Obama: "confidence will rise"
Accessed September 19, 2008 at 8:20pm
No doubt that the biggest topic in the news is the economic crisis. So, it would make sense that the politicians are going to be making comments about it as well.
Senator Obama has been talking about the economy for quite some time now, but after talking to the Treasury Department and his financial advisors, he believes that the financial markets will stabilize soon. He is reportedly giving measured responses and no longer providing an economic plan. He suggested that although he and John McCain will argue for different economic plans, they should work together towards what the country needs. Although he avoided the partisan words during his address of the economy, he did not hestitate to attack McCain afterwards.
The brief article does not have a strong leaning one way or the other. However, the fact that they are reporting on Barack Obama's response to the economic crisis and government bailout suggests the liberal leaning.
No doubt that the biggest topic in the news is the economic crisis. So, it would make sense that the politicians are going to be making comments about it as well.
Senator Obama has been talking about the economy for quite some time now, but after talking to the Treasury Department and his financial advisors, he believes that the financial markets will stabilize soon. He is reportedly giving measured responses and no longer providing an economic plan. He suggested that although he and John McCain will argue for different economic plans, they should work together towards what the country needs. Although he avoided the partisan words during his address of the economy, he did not hestitate to attack McCain afterwards.
The brief article does not have a strong leaning one way or the other. However, the fact that they are reporting on Barack Obama's response to the economic crisis and government bailout suggests the liberal leaning.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
What are the fundamentals?
Accessed at 11:30pm on Tuesday September 16
NY Times states that John McCain made a big mistake when he said that the fundamentals of the economy are very strong. At first glance, this statement is absolutely ridiculous, and the Democratic party ran with it. This comes only days (hours) after news about Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch. The campaign had three choices: do nothing, attack the other side, or fix it. Fix it they did when only hours later he backpedaled. What are the fundamentals of the economy? For McCain, he meant that the fundamentals are the workers themselves. On Tuesday morning he stated that workers are paying a heavy price while the CEOs of big businesses are left with 'golden parachute' packages of millions of dollars. He did state that the economy was in big problems, and that the Republican party and those in Washington were to blame.
I agree that McCain cannot afford to stumble on this topic, but he did. The campaign did a very good job at saving the potential problem. In class tonight (Election 2008 with Dr. Rupp), we discussed the differences between conservatives, liberals, libertarians, and populists, among many other things. The fact that McCain is sticking up for the workers of America and stating that the big business and big government is the problem with the economy strikes a populist tone. This is a very smart idea. McCain is going to have to reach towards the populists in order to win the election.
NY Times states that John McCain made a big mistake when he said that the fundamentals of the economy are very strong. At first glance, this statement is absolutely ridiculous, and the Democratic party ran with it. This comes only days (hours) after news about Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch. The campaign had three choices: do nothing, attack the other side, or fix it. Fix it they did when only hours later he backpedaled. What are the fundamentals of the economy? For McCain, he meant that the fundamentals are the workers themselves. On Tuesday morning he stated that workers are paying a heavy price while the CEOs of big businesses are left with 'golden parachute' packages of millions of dollars. He did state that the economy was in big problems, and that the Republican party and those in Washington were to blame.
I agree that McCain cannot afford to stumble on this topic, but he did. The campaign did a very good job at saving the potential problem. In class tonight (Election 2008 with Dr. Rupp), we discussed the differences between conservatives, liberals, libertarians, and populists, among many other things. The fact that McCain is sticking up for the workers of America and stating that the big business and big government is the problem with the economy strikes a populist tone. This is a very smart idea. McCain is going to have to reach towards the populists in order to win the election.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Palin takes another hit from the NY Times
Accessed Saturday, September 13, 2008 at 6:40 pm.
Many of the main articles today were about Hurricane Ike, but not surprisingly there was yet another article below about Palin. Afraid that I might have been over analyzing the New York Times as being too liberal, I decided to print off the article, "In Office, Palin Hired Friends and Hit Critics," by Jo Becker, Peter S. Goodman, and Michael Powell. I highlighted the negative things said about her in blue and the positive things in pink. Needless to say, the article is a sea of blue.
Much of the source of negativity came from the harsh language. Pursuing a personal vendetta, striking, ordering, firing, and "her wrath" are just some of the words used to describe her and her policies. The authors present evidence that strongly questions her governing style. The main message was that her administration is littered with secrecy and overreaction to personal issues. After reading the entire article, I feel as if it was misrepresented. Almost all of the information came from interviews from people.
On specific issues, the McCain Palin campaign offered statements, but on more generalized assumptions, they did not. They did acknowledge that she has many supporters and instills deep emotions into her campaign. This article was written for liberal readers and therefore, they will see everything that they want to see. As a conservative reading the article, I was able to notice that some of the things that I thought positivive, would be considered negative by those Democrats. For example, "she appointed a pastor to the town planning board." That is just further evidence to her character. When the news about Ruedrich (running campaign business from the mayor's office) was found out about a columnist, she openly admited to doing wrong and released a press release to address the problem.
"Since taking office in 2007, Ms. Palin has spent 312 nights at her Wasilla home, some 600 miles to the north of the governor's mansion in Juneau. At first I wondered if she would move to Washington D.C. if she becomes vice-president, and will her family move with her? I had thought that it was 312/365, but when I read it again I realized that it said 2007 (more than a year ago). It is such sly writing as this that can get people confused on their facts.
Many of the main articles today were about Hurricane Ike, but not surprisingly there was yet another article below about Palin. Afraid that I might have been over analyzing the New York Times as being too liberal, I decided to print off the article, "In Office, Palin Hired Friends and Hit Critics," by Jo Becker, Peter S. Goodman, and Michael Powell. I highlighted the negative things said about her in blue and the positive things in pink. Needless to say, the article is a sea of blue.
Much of the source of negativity came from the harsh language. Pursuing a personal vendetta, striking, ordering, firing, and "her wrath" are just some of the words used to describe her and her policies. The authors present evidence that strongly questions her governing style. The main message was that her administration is littered with secrecy and overreaction to personal issues. After reading the entire article, I feel as if it was misrepresented. Almost all of the information came from interviews from people.
On specific issues, the McCain Palin campaign offered statements, but on more generalized assumptions, they did not. They did acknowledge that she has many supporters and instills deep emotions into her campaign. This article was written for liberal readers and therefore, they will see everything that they want to see. As a conservative reading the article, I was able to notice that some of the things that I thought positivive, would be considered negative by those Democrats. For example, "she appointed a pastor to the town planning board." That is just further evidence to her character. When the news about Ruedrich (running campaign business from the mayor's office) was found out about a columnist, she openly admited to doing wrong and released a press release to address the problem.
"Since taking office in 2007, Ms. Palin has spent 312 nights at her Wasilla home, some 600 miles to the north of the governor's mansion in Juneau. At first I wondered if she would move to Washington D.C. if she becomes vice-president, and will her family move with her? I had thought that it was 312/365, but when I read it again I realized that it said 2007 (more than a year ago). It is such sly writing as this that can get people confused on their facts.
Friday, September 12, 2008
What it takes to win
Accessed September 12, 2008 at 12:45 PM
Barack Obama is stepping it up by attacking his opponent on television ads. Is that dirty politics or just doing what it takes to win? Either way, it is safe to say that Obama was taken off guard with the Republican energy that stems from the choice of Sarah Palin. Although I consider this to be dirty politicking, the New York Times was not slow to state that it was in response to McCain's false and misleading "back to back attack" ads.
The buzz word for this election is change; and who can provide the most of it. Obama's attack plays off this word by stating that "things have changed in the last 26 years, but John McCain hasn't... after one president who was out of touch, we just can't afford more of the same." Because the choice of Palin has stirred up the class of working women, Obama's advertisements touch on the subject of pay equity for women. According the Obama campaign, McCain has "seized" the change issue from them, which led them having to resort to attacks. Even though the majority of the article is sympathetic towards the Democrats, it acknowledges disunity in what the Democrats think that the campaign should be doing.
At such a critical time in both campaigns, it is almost expected that both tickets are becoming aggressive. I believe that the election is going to come down to the working white, working women and independent voters. However, I see Obama's attacks as a desperate attempt to try and sway those voters back towards the center, and hopefully (before the election) back over to the left. But never failing to spin the article, New York Times assures readers that the Obama campaign is not struggling, only a little behind the symbol for change that Palin has provided. No worries though, Obama has met with Former President Bill Clinton for strategies. Which if that is the case, this election just got more interesting.
Is Sarah Palin Ready?
Accessed at 12:12 AM on September 12, 2008
In the article entitled, "In First Big Interview, Palin Says 'I'm Ready for the Job," the journalist from the NY Times gives his take on Palin's interview on Thursday with Charles Gibson from ABC interview. Although Palin was noted as saying that she was ready for the job without hesitation. Gibson is not known for giving an easy interview, but one of the reasons that the McCain campaign went with him is that he is known to be taken seriously. As her first interview with a major news organization, the NY Times seems to rip poor Sarah apart.
According to the NY Times, Palin was visibly nervous and stuck to her scripted answers. Under Gibson's pressure, she repeated a lot of phrases, but perhaps her biggest mistake was stumbling when asked if she agreed with the Bush Doctrine on "anticipatory self-defense." Through the "blizzard of words" that Palin provided Gibson with, he expressed exhasperation and pointed to her inconsistancies. Palin was presented as the overscripted, underprepared vice-presidential candidate.
The article was written as a way to disqualify Palin as a suitable candidate and associate her with some of the less popular decisions the Bush Administration has made. I however, feel that as her first interview as the potential vice president of the United States, it is understandable that she would be nervous. Although I would have liked to see the actual interview, I'm 99% sure that NY Times is staying true to character and spinning this story to the left.
In the article entitled, "In First Big Interview, Palin Says 'I'm Ready for the Job," the journalist from the NY Times gives his take on Palin's interview on Thursday with Charles Gibson from ABC interview. Although Palin was noted as saying that she was ready for the job without hesitation. Gibson is not known for giving an easy interview, but one of the reasons that the McCain campaign went with him is that he is known to be taken seriously. As her first interview with a major news organization, the NY Times seems to rip poor Sarah apart.
According to the NY Times, Palin was visibly nervous and stuck to her scripted answers. Under Gibson's pressure, she repeated a lot of phrases, but perhaps her biggest mistake was stumbling when asked if she agreed with the Bush Doctrine on "anticipatory self-defense." Through the "blizzard of words" that Palin provided Gibson with, he expressed exhasperation and pointed to her inconsistancies. Palin was presented as the overscripted, underprepared vice-presidential candidate.
The article was written as a way to disqualify Palin as a suitable candidate and associate her with some of the less popular decisions the Bush Administration has made. I however, feel that as her first interview as the potential vice president of the United States, it is understandable that she would be nervous. Although I would have liked to see the actual interview, I'm 99% sure that NY Times is staying true to character and spinning this story to the left.
Monday, September 8, 2008
Politics and Motherhood
Accessed Monday, September 8 at 7:00 am
When Senator McCain chose Governor Palin as his running mate he added the subject of gender to the election. In the past, there has always been the issue of a woman being too emotional or with too many responsibilities to become a president. This article entitled, "Fusing Politics and Motherhood in a New Way," clearly puts that theory to rest where Palin is concerned. She was afraid when she discovered she was pregnant that the people of Alaska would think that she would take too much time off. After traveling ten hours home and then giving birth to Trig Paxton Van Palin one month early, she returned to work only three days later. Where many women in politics try to seperate their children and work, Palin embraces the two together.
The article overall places the emphasis on Palin's humanity versus other women in politics (say, Hilary Clinton maybe?) She even has a baby crib in her Anchorage office. Critics of the Republican ticket could use all of this to to swing it to the left if needed, stating the age old phrase that women are too emotional to be considered on the presidential ticket. But when it comes down to it, this article seems to be more for Republicans than Democrats.
When Senator McCain chose Governor Palin as his running mate he added the subject of gender to the election. In the past, there has always been the issue of a woman being too emotional or with too many responsibilities to become a president. This article entitled, "Fusing Politics and Motherhood in a New Way," clearly puts that theory to rest where Palin is concerned. She was afraid when she discovered she was pregnant that the people of Alaska would think that she would take too much time off. After traveling ten hours home and then giving birth to Trig Paxton Van Palin one month early, she returned to work only three days later. Where many women in politics try to seperate their children and work, Palin embraces the two together.
The article overall places the emphasis on Palin's humanity versus other women in politics (say, Hilary Clinton maybe?) She even has a baby crib in her Anchorage office. Critics of the Republican ticket could use all of this to to swing it to the left if needed, stating the age old phrase that women are too emotional to be considered on the presidential ticket. But when it comes down to it, this article seems to be more for Republicans than Democrats.
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Battleground Election
Accessed Sunday, September 7, 2008 at 11:00 pm.
As we all have gathered by now, this election is going to be a close one. With only eight weeks to go until the election, political strategists have been guessing about all the possible winning combinations for both sides. This article entitled, "Rival Tickets are Redrawing Battlegrounds," talks about possible battleground states for the 2008 election, which seems to be almost every state. The Republican choice of Palin has had some effect in states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, but for the Obama campaign, they aren't worried that Palin could potentially bring in women and independent voters.
Although this article seemed to be impartial for the most part, there were several small instances that the New York Times spun it to the left. Other than generally putting more faith in Barak Obama, the wording that is chosen sways the reader to favor the left while understanding the right. For example: McCain has appeal while Obama has broad appeal. And while McCain had a "slow start" on the campaign, Obama isn't forgetting about voters in the strong Republican states.
As we all have gathered by now, this election is going to be a close one. With only eight weeks to go until the election, political strategists have been guessing about all the possible winning combinations for both sides. This article entitled, "Rival Tickets are Redrawing Battlegrounds," talks about possible battleground states for the 2008 election, which seems to be almost every state. The Republican choice of Palin has had some effect in states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, but for the Obama campaign, they aren't worried that Palin could potentially bring in women and independent voters.
Although this article seemed to be impartial for the most part, there were several small instances that the New York Times spun it to the left. Other than generally putting more faith in Barak Obama, the wording that is chosen sways the reader to favor the left while understanding the right. For example: McCain has appeal while Obama has broad appeal. And while McCain had a "slow start" on the campaign, Obama isn't forgetting about voters in the strong Republican states.
Palin's religous views
Accessed Saturday, September 6, 2008 at 11:15 p.m.
This article talks about Palin's religious affiliation and how it had affected her life and her political decisions. She was raised in an Assembly of God church. After taking the office of Alaskin Governor, she turned to the pastor of the church for guidance on leading the state. The pastor thought very highly of Palin and her biblical knowledge. She has since started to attend Wassilla Bible Church. The pastor of WBC, Larry Kroon, was quoted as saying that she was a "back bencher rather than a leading light." She has also been quoted as saying that her work as the governor would be hampered "if the people of Alaska's heart isn't right with God."
To some people this article might confirm Palin as a strong candidate for the vice-presidency. But I feel that overall the NY Times tries to sway voters to think that her religious values and beliefs will affect the way she leads the nation. For many, the literal translation of the Bible is understood as anti-homosexual, anti-abortion, and anti-corruption, and this may make many Democrats nervous. When Kroon was quoted about Palin being a back-bencher, this was probably staged to make her seem as if she was using her religion for publicity instead of trying to stay out of the limelight and putting more focus on God.
This article talks about Palin's religious affiliation and how it had affected her life and her political decisions. She was raised in an Assembly of God church. After taking the office of Alaskin Governor, she turned to the pastor of the church for guidance on leading the state. The pastor thought very highly of Palin and her biblical knowledge. She has since started to attend Wassilla Bible Church. The pastor of WBC, Larry Kroon, was quoted as saying that she was a "back bencher rather than a leading light." She has also been quoted as saying that her work as the governor would be hampered "if the people of Alaska's heart isn't right with God."
To some people this article might confirm Palin as a strong candidate for the vice-presidency. But I feel that overall the NY Times tries to sway voters to think that her religious values and beliefs will affect the way she leads the nation. For many, the literal translation of the Bible is understood as anti-homosexual, anti-abortion, and anti-corruption, and this may make many Democrats nervous. When Kroon was quoted about Palin being a back-bencher, this was probably staged to make her seem as if she was using her religion for publicity instead of trying to stay out of the limelight and putting more focus on God.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)