1) After reading the chapter and how it discusses the effectiveness of
debates on the outcome of the election, how important do you think debates
are? Do you follow the issues or are you swayed by the candidate's
eloquence or how he/she attacks the other candidate? Is the debate usually
the first time you have heard about the candidate's stance on certain
issues or do you try to learn about them ahead of time?
2) How do you think the 2003 recall election was different than the 2008
presidential election in terms of debates? Think about the number of
candidates: last year's being debates between two people and the reading
showing debates for governor between seven people. How would this
influence voters, interest in all these different peoples' policies, etc?
Do you think people went with Arnold out of name recognition among all
those people running for governor?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
To me, debates are extremely important. They are the one, main opportunity we have to hear the candidates talk about their ideas,positions,platforms, and solutions. It comes straight from their mouths to our ears without any one else's words thrown in. I believe that without debates I would know much less about the candidates and where they stand on certain issues, especially when they are different from those of their political party.
I think debates are important because you get to see both parties at the same time and hear both of their views on different things. Also debates could also be bad because I sometimes feel the canisates loose sight of what the debate is really supposed to be about, and instead they are there to attack their competition. I feel debates are good in the sense you can see how that canidate will respond in stressful cituations. I feel that most people are swayed by the canidates eloquence or how bad they can attack the other party because to people thats more interesting then what the issues are about. And also for most people the debate is the first time they have heard of these people, which is not always good because like in the reading the media picks and chooses only certain things. i think that debates need to focus more on the issues that are in hand and also people need to do their research before watching the debate so that they arent suckered into only what the media is saying.
What I thought was funny was that in 2003 Davis told the media that we should have a governor who can actually say California. Right when he said it he got ridiculed and was forced to give an apology. Arnold made a joke about Davis and everyone laughed and moved on. Is it the accent he has? Is it because he was an actor? Its hard to say. Maybe everyone just thought anyone can be better than Davis and Arnold seems to know what he's doing.
I feel that the presence of a candidate is important...as shown in this past election with President Obama winning the popular vote mostly because of his stage presence. I am usually good at following issues of certain candidates before I choose who I want to represent my vote. I feel that most Americans or Californians do not choose for themselves based on the candidates stance on specific issues. Most Americans or voters are swayed by the adds and attacks on their fellow candidates. I feel that these adds are all propaganda and none of them are worth watching...If you want real news about what "Shady" stuff a candidate is doing, then look online or view a credible source. Before a debate I attempt to learn about the specific issues before they are discussed in the debate. I feel that if a person does not attempt to learn about the issues before the debate their minds are too easily swayed. I think that debates are extremely important, if people do the research on the candidates like they are suppose to, then people can make the educated vote for their candidate without all the persuasion included.
The 2003 recall election was different than any other election because it was a free for all with multiple unqualified candidates running to prove a point about the system. With so many candidates, it's difficult for voters to determine which one aligns with their political views. Debates are helpful but with so many candidates the only real way to compare all the candidates would be to create a chart with all the major issues and how each one stands.
After the recall of a Democrat, the Republicans had an advantage in the election. So if a voter is uninformed and is just planning on voting for a Republican, the most familiar and best-advertised name is going to earn that vote, even if that name is familiar for non-political reasons.
Post a Comment