A Student's Influence in this Election

In an article in today’s Chicago Tribune, Jim Tankersley discussed which states are predicted to have a majority of votes for Obama versus McCain. He mentioned several states that have the potential to go either way. Specifically, Colorado appears that it could go either way. Looking at past history and changes in voter registration, Tankersley goes on to say,
“President George W. Bush won Colorado by 100,000 votes in 2004. Democrats have surged to match Republicans on the voter rolls, and young people have registered in record numbers. If the ’04 election were held today in Colorado, and all demographic groups performed as they did then, strategists say John Kerry would win by 75,000 votes.”
It appears that new young voters have the potential to make a significant impact on this election. My brother is a freshman at college in the state of Indiana and he was thinking of switching his voter registration to that state, a political swing state, where his vote would have more significance. Many of his friends have done just that. With the tens of thousands of students in “out of state” universities, I am wondering if they shift their location to vote, could they have a significant outcome on the election?

Do you think that college students should be able to change their voter registration from their home state to the state they are studying in? Do you think that college age voters will have a significant impact on the outcome of the election?

The Health Privacy Act and Vice Presidential Candidates

While reading the Chicago Tribune this morning I encountered an article titled “Candidates guard details about their health.” This article discussed how both Joe Biden and Sarah Palin have denied access to their medical records. The article contained information stating that in 1988 Joe Biden had a brain aneurysm rupture and this resulted in two surgery procedures. Since then, Biden has remained in good health. In the article, David Wade, Biden’s spokesperson stated that Biden “leads an active lifestyle, works out regularly even as he campaigns, and his wife and family always make sure he drinks plenty of water and eats right. After a health scare over 20 years ago, he’s been blessed with excellent health.” Also, Sarah Palin's representatives said, "We are not going to participate in this piece," but the article shared that in April of 2008 Sarah Palin was pregnant with her fifth child. Just after realizing that her water broke and knowing that her baby was one month premature, Palin decided to take a plane 3,000 miles from Texas to Alaska. This was not only dangerous for the child’s health, but it was also taking the chance that Palin could have been forced to deliver the child in the air. I believe that the general public benefits from knowing this information. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) passed by Congress in 1996 gives each of us privacy in terms of our health information. I completely understand that the vice presidential candidates’ wish for privacy; however, should an exception be made for these individuals running for the highest offices in our country to make public their health information? Should the voting public have all the information and not have any secrets kept from them especially when serious health conditions could affect the security of our nation? I think that it is important for the voters to know as much as possible about each candidate so that they are able to make the best decision when determining who they want to vote for. Do you think that the public should have access to health records?

How much does the public’s knowledge of topics affect their perception of the Presidential Debate?

(time: 28:50 to 29:00)

In class we had a discussion on the Presidential Debate that took place at Hofstra University. We were talking about how some of the facts that the candidates stated were not true. A specific example of “slanting the facts” came up in our discussion on abortion and stem cell research. In the third debate, McCain reprimanded Obama for an ad stating that he is “opposed to funding stem cell research.” As we discussed it in class, I had the impression that the ad was about McCain being against abortion but supporting stem cell research. I was thinking that Obama made a good point. However, as I re-watched the third debate (time: 28:40 to 29:00) and tracked down the transcript from Obama’s radio ad, it did indeed state that McCain has “opposed stem cell research.” Using other articles, factcheck.org, and politifact.com, it appears that McCain changed his mind in 2001 and has supported both embryonic stem cell research and adult stem cell research ever since. In fact, both Obama and McCain voted in support of bills funding embryonic stem cell research that Bush vetoed. Both candidates misrepresent the facts. Obama’s ad falsely represents McCain’s position. However, it seems like McCain is trying to hide the fact that he supports “embryonic” stem cell research for two reasons. First, it goes against his party’s position on abortion, Pro-life. Second, Palin is against embryonic stem cell research. Thus, both candidates change and manipulate the facts to support their claims. I believe that the public audience needs to know more about the topics being discussed and the past history of the candidates. If the public knows this, they would be able to evaluate whether the candidates' comments are true or false.

Do you think that there is any way that people can be informed while the debate is occurring to find out the truth? Do you think that this is important to keep in mind when watching a political debate?

Has Our Economy been flushed down the Toilet? : U.S. Deficit

(political cartoon scanned on from the Chicago Tribune Newspaper.)

While watching the “Real Time with Bill Maher” show, I listened to a democrat from California, Maxine Waters, and a republican journalist, Stephen Moore discussing politics, the economy, and taxes. During this discussion, Bill Maher made a comment about our countries debt problem. When Clinton was leaving office, our country took down the debt clock because we had a surplus of money. Currently, as Bush is preparing to leave office, again our country has taken down the debt clock, but this time for a different reason. We need to add another digit to the clock because our debt has exceeded ten trillion dollars (ten thousand billion dollars). To eliminate this debt, each household would have to provide 480 thousand dollars. If this trend is not reversed our country could go bankrupt. Where does our country even start when approaching the task to defeat this debt?

Palin vs. Biden Debate: Was this a Debate?

Debating can be viewed as a formal discussion or argument regarding a specific topic. The moderator introduces the question the debaters are to discuss. Throughout the debate I found it interesting that Governor Palin seemed to purposely get off topic. She would be asked a question and her answer would be about an entirely different idea. This did not happen on every question, but it occurred frequently during Palin’s portion of the debate. It seemed like Palin had a number of pre-rehearsed speeches that she was determined to give. It also appeared as if the questions were irrelevant and not important as long as she could cover another one of the topics on her list.
I vividly remember watching the portion of the debate where Palin was asked to say what promises her party has made that cannot be kept. Her response had nothing to do with the question; she spoke about energy instead. Gwen Ifill, debate moderator, had to ask the question again after hearing the response. You can see this in the short video clip below. The event I am describing takes place between 3:10 and 3:40.
What other examples have you noticed where Sarah Palin swayed to a different topic when answering a question?
What other interesting things did you notice occurring in the debate?
Did you consider this hour and a half to be a debate for both candidates?