The past year has truly been an inimitable one, from mudslinging campaign commercials to scandals released and spread virally over the internet. There were many ups and downs for both candidates, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Not only was the outcome shocking to many, but the ride to November 8th was bumpy, to say the least and, regardless of the candidate one supported, it was a rough ride for us all. Both Secretary Clinton and Mr. Trump varied greatly on many levels. Secretary Clinton lost the general election after she did not receive enough electoral votes, despite winning the popular vote. I argue Secretary Clinton could have achieved the electoral votes needed to win the presidency, had she campaigned harder, relied less on the voting …show more content…
Mr. Trump stated he had planned on repealing and replacing President Obama’s healthcare program known as Obamacare. A proper plan regarding what he would replace it with was not released, but he stood firm on repealing Obamacare. Secretary Clinton completely disagreed with Mr. Trump on what the country needed in regards to healthcare. Where Mr. Trump felt it would benefit the American people to completely get rid of Obamacare, Secretary Clinton made it clear that not only would she keep Obamacare if elected, she would expand and reform it. Many times, these topics were brought up in at least one of the three debates, as they were extremely important to the citizens of the country. These three topics of policy exemplified the divide between the candidates. For many, it was difficult to stand in the middle, as no candidate seemed to offer such perspectives. For that reason, I argue this created extreme partisan between the citizens and may have even played a part in Secretary Clinton’s loss. Having such partisan policy standpoints led many to settle for one side or another. Perhaps Secretary Clinton drifted too far and led many who normally vote democrat to cross party lines and support Mr. Trump …show more content…
Similar to the other two states mentioned, Pennsylvania is normally viewed as a “blue state.” However, the electoral votes were not considered wholly devoted to the Democratic Party, thus one saw more of Secretary Clinton campaigning here compared to the other two states. Secretary Clinton and Mr. Trump had many individuals campaigning on their behalves in an attempt to cover as much of the state as possible within the limited time available (Schultheis). When it comes to polling, Secretary Clinton appears to have the upper hand in the state. After analyzing other polls, RealClearPolitics stated that Secretary Clinton was leading the race by 2.1%
Andrew Jackson was the seventh president of the United States and was one of the most controversial presidents ever. Jackson initially gained national fame through his role in the War of 1812, where he led a victory over the British at the Battle of New Orleans. Three year laters, Jackson invaded the Spanish-Florida territory which directed to the Adams-Onis Treaty. Although Andrew Jackson proved to be a great military strategist, his unneeded hostility, which was brought out in the Spoils System, the Indian Removal Act, and the ongoing feud with the National Bank, ultimately classify him as poor president.
Obama’s 2008 election threw a wrench in the works when it comes to classifying Clinton’s election and future elections. “When a stable persistent voter coalition is established, the vote is non-successive elections will be highly correlated” (Pomper 544). The non-successive elections of 2000, 2004, and 2016 certainly support this. The same might be said, however, for 2008, 2012, and 2020 if a democratic candidate puts up similar numbers to Obama. If that were so, does that make 2016 a “temporary peculiarity” and 2008 a critical election? It is impossible to know until the time comes that 2008 and 2012 can really be looked back on. Pomper encourages people to look at elections and candidates not as isolated events, but to “focus on the similarities between different elections, … classify them … abstract some patterns” (Pomper 535), but can this always hold true? Obama’s substantial victory in 2008 could be coughed up to Campbell’s fundamentals. The Republicans are in their second term, the economy is at its lowest since the Great Depression, and Bush’s approval rating is at 25% by the end of October (Gallup). In that case, the Democratic voter base may not have really changed, but more people voted Democrat because they were unhappy with Bush. “Either the ‘Obama coalition’ is very much Obama’s rather than his party’s, or that his victories are due to circumstances”
The topic that I am choosing to do is on Obama Care. I chose this topic because the idea of the government forcing people to obtain insurance is wrong in my eyes. I am interested in analyzing the validity for what has been said about this topic in order to increase my understanding about Obama Care. I am not an expert when it comes to Obama Care. I know that this is an insurance that is being provided through the government for the general public. I have read that President Obama never initially read the whole bill itself. I also know that people who cannot afford it, but make too much money to qualify for Medicaid are being heavily encouraged to get this insurance. Some of the common knowledge that I have found that the general public has about this subject is that some people are for Obama Care and think that it is a wonderful idea and that there are some people that are dead set against Obama Care. Younger adults, specifically college age and individuals that are in their twenties tend to be for Obama Care. The insurance is being forced upon individuals that may or may not want it. It also seems as though that the insurance being offered is pretty generic in terms of coverage. Some of the questions that I have that I believe will aide me in writing this paper would be the following: What are the pros and cons of Obama Care? What are the thoughts of Obama Care with the people of the government? As well as what are the basics of Obama Care?
In my opinion, Nixon's biggest problem was that he was uncertain of his future, not only before the election, but also during the Watergate trials. Nixon needed to have more confidence in his policies and himself as a person in order to impress the public. Turing to illegal tactic only tarnished his name. After the scandal became public, President Nixon was filled with concerns about his presidential position. As a result, I do not think that he would have been able to preform all of his duties to the best of his ability. In the end, I believe it was extremely brave for President Ford to pardon Nixon. He not only helped a man in need, but he showed his respect to him as well as the country. But pardoning Nixon, Ford allowed the country
In 1992 the incumbent president George Bush was seeking reelection. It was the general consensus that he would be the 'hands down, no contest winner'. When the smoke had cleared and the votes were tallied, many were shocked at the results. Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton had defeated the incumbent by a landslide! How could this be? How did the commander and chief of what could be considered the greatest victory in modern American history defeat the Iraqi army and one year later lose the election for the presidency? The answers to these questions as well as explanations for the outcome lie within the campaign strategies and tactics used by each candidate. There were various major political events and public opinion data that occurred throughout the general election stage of the campaign. This paper will analyze both the political events and the public opinion data, in hopes of developing a better understanding as to what helped shape the overall outcome. There were three candidates in the race for the presidency, President Bush (R), Bill Clinton (D), and Ross Perot (I). Each of the three, to a greater or lesser extent, focused their campaign on the economy. President Bush focused more of his campaign on criticizing his opponents primarily Bill Clinton. He would often compare the economy to that of other nations, claiming it wasn't all that bad and resumed attacking his opponents. Bill Clinton on the other hand focused his campaign strategy on implementing the need for 'change.' At that time the national debt and unemployment was rising. Clinton vowed to improve the economy and the quality of life for the American people by bringing about change. Ross Perot was more of a crusader against Washin...
Barack Obama is either living in his own little fantasy world or trying to lull Americans to sleep by reading from his liberal-progressive, “Big Book of Fairy Tales.”
Donald Trump is a highly successful business titan, real estate mogul, reality television personality, and now a 2016 presidential candidate. Since announcing his candidacy this past June, he has been very loquacious on his views pertaining to foreign policy. He takes a very realist approach when addressing these issues. His views are very much in line with the belief that the international political arena is not dominated by altruistic ideologies, but rather nation-states that are self-interested. His foreign policy platform centers on using hard power to achieve America’s goals in the Middle East and to eradicate illegal immigration.
The 2016 presidential election has been one of the most talked about elections because of one man, Donald Trump. When the billionaire real estate mogul announced that he would be running for the Republican Party candidacy in the 2016 presidential election, he sent this country into an uproar. Donald Trump, who has never shied away from the media, has become one of the most talked about presidential candidate in history. On the day of his announcement for the republican candidacy, he sparked controversy because of his comment about the Mexican people, stating:
Based on the performance and content of the presidential debate, Hillary Clinton emerged the winner. A debate is a typical adversarial argument, which is characterized by competition. There is one winner and one loser. The argument revolves around two people who have different or opposite ways of thinking, argue the same topic. The arguer is intent on changing the other’s beliefs. Further, the arguer usually tries to refute the opponent by showing or invalidating the opponent’s viewpoints. In this first presidential debate, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton stated their claims and provided supporting facts to prove each is the better candidate for president. Both Donald and Hillary set out to sway more people to “their side” as choice for president of the United States.
In the midst of one of the most controversial presidential elections in history, both political parties are struggling to prove that their candidate is the best choice. Clinton and Trump’s disapproval ratings are very low, but one has to ask, is there really a lesser evil to choose from? While Clinton has had her own fair share of past discrepancies, Trump’s track record proves much more troublesome. Donald Trump has proven to be an untrustworthy presidential candidate because of his misogynistic actions, his racial bias, and his corrupt business history.
On March 23,2010 former President Barack Obama signed into law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, often referred to by its nickname: Obamacare. This law would ideally offer all U.S. citizens the opportunity to obtain health insurance at a decent and affordable rate. There were many other incentives that came along with this law being passed. While it was well received by some, there were many whom opposed this law. A great portion of the GOP (republican party) were very vocal in opposition to this law, and desired to have it repealed all together. With the recent election of newly elected President Donald Trump, they would see this realization come to pass. While there
After arguably the most divisive and polarizing election in the history of the United States, many Americans are asking how exactly did we get here? Political scholars and experts overrun cable news shows and newspaper editorials with troubling claims declaring that America may be a more polarized nation today than at any other time in its long history. There is no doubt that the American electorate is divided nearly along party lines on almost all current policy issues. Republicans and Democrats seem to be shifting farther and farther toward opposite ends of the ideological spectrum. This paper aims to answer the question of what the primary cause for this current state of polarization is.
January 8, 2016, marked the day of the United States of America’s official election. Prior to that day, thousands of people lined up in the cold weather to cast their votes with the hope that their voices and opinions would be heard. All year many people including myself joked about the possibilities of Donald John Trump actually becoming president because of his arrogance, harsh statements, lack of political knowledge, and lack of political experience. Unfortunately for the many people that held the popular vote and opinion, Trump was elected President of the United States of America on Tuesday, November 8, 2016, and was officially sworn in as President on January 20, 2017. Though a majority of Americans voted against Trump, due to this country’s Electoral College system he was able to win the election, and an instance like this has only occurred four times in our countries history. The Electoral College
According to lecture, before Obamacare was introduced, about one third of the people in the United States got insurance from one of three government programs: Medicare, Medicad and CHIP. There were about sixteen to twenty percent were uninsured during that time who were mostly young adults and people who were poor. This can caused them not to have the opportunity to seek medical attention when they need to. Obamacare changed all of that because it helped those who did not have medical insurance to have insurance. Not only Obamacare increases the “utility” by increasing the pleasure in a society, it helps the least advantaged in society, however members in society will not see healthcare as a commodity that could be bought and sold.
Two of my friends, who happen to be Latinos, support Trump. Eric Marquez and Victor Luna both firmly believe Trump is the right person to lead the Nation. However, time and time again, Donald Trump has made statements that suggest these two would be voting against their best interest and the best interest of the country.