Elections and the Internet

The Internet has changed the shape of the elections with candidates now having more outlets to put their name out there and gain recognition. With the the candidates having more press and giving more people the ability to recognize who they are and what they stand for, and more press time also means more votes. I think President Obama did a wonderful job of utilizing all outlets in his campaign this past year, and that alone really did increase his popularity and probably won him a lot of the younger tech-savy vote.
As far as candidates running a campaign that was based upon what their party thinks, and not necessarily according to what they believe I feel as if both candidates ran based more on their party. Recently John McCain came out and said he felt that he was more of a "puppet" for the party, rather than running the way he wanted to. I also feel in a way Obama ran a similar campaign based a lot upon what his party thought, but I also do feel he ran a campaign that seemed much more personal. I think he ran such a personal campaign because he had a large fan base on the internet and could connect with people on the internet, which automatically made them feel a personal touch much more from President Obama.
Remembering the Obama campaign I think he did follow the guidelines described by Teachout. He created a small community atmosphere on the internet, and brought people into his personal life, he connected with them on many levels. I think he did the same thing by allowing magazines like People and US come into his home and photograph him and his family, showing that they are just a normal family which is what every American can connect with.

Pull Out From Iraq

Iraq was a major point of the previous election, and was probably a large reason why President Obama gained so much support from much of the country. His promises to pull troops out of Iraq within months was something much of the country wanted to hear, and because he said it they believed and bought it. Now Obama has moved that pullout of troops time from 16 months to 19 months from his inauguration, a decision I feel is one of the better ones he has made while in office. Now I do not feel that it is the best idea to take troops out of Iraq and leave it to waver as a new country and new government. I feel the troops need to be there until the job is done, and these three extra months may allow for Obama to continue to rethink his choice and possibly notice the importance of the troops being there.
Because this was such an important topic of the recent election it is clearly an important topic in all of party politics, which at this time in the country is being looked over by the economic crisis and the inflated stimulus bill, but the troops and the country of Iraq cannot afford to be overlooked. Members from each party need to evaluate what state Iraq is in, and whether or not they truly feel the country can be left to monitor itself, and become a country not ruled by terrorism. Each party cannot allow their party lines separate them from what the feel is right, and allow a thinning of troops in Iraq endanger the Americans serving their, not only that but protecting what those brave soldiers have already accomplished.
Now if the country is ready to rule itself, and protect itself against an insecure area, and one riddled with terrorist groups. The troops have done a magnificent job bringing Iraq to the state it has become, and hopefully one day soon all the troops can leave there and come back home safe, but until then they need to continue to serve their country like they have, and those of us fortunate enough to be safe here need to support them.

Elections

Finance has everything to do with everything. How money is handed out to given representatives is extremely important to those candidates seeking election. In many ways it determines how frequently and effectively they can get their name out there to the public, and just having your name out there can help produce results in many ways.
I do not understand the point of trying to regulate the money being spent on elections, I say if they can raise it why not spend it. Today with much of the money being spent coming from individual donations why should a candidate have to limit how they spend that money. I see the importance of having the money be accounted for, and do think it is important for the candidate to list where the money came from, but as far as limiting the funds they can use it doesn't help either party. I also feel that political action committees having less influence may be a good thing. With more individuals having put the money towards a campaign the person being elected has less influence from outside sources which could mean a more beneficial agenda for the general public if that person is elected.
Partisan politics is effected by the donations from more individuals and less from the party in that the candidate may feel less obligated to the party because in a sense they didn't help out as much to accomplish what the individual did. With money coming from all over the place the candidate will feel more obligated to push the agenda of the people rather than of their party. This can create less loyal parties, but also can benefit the people, because that elected official may more likely be working for them than for their parties agenda. http://www.fec.gov/DisclosureSearch/mapApp.do

Passing the Bill without Party Support

The Stimulus bill just passed and from my previous post I'm sure it is quite obvious I do not feel it was a great idea. But it was a rather large mistake passing it without support from each party. The decision to pass the bill was so rushed that many people did not even get a chance to read it, and comprehend what it all contained. What it also did was put a even greater division between the parties that existed before.
So far in the Obama presidency the term bi-partisanship has been on display, and was a major part of his election campaign focusing on how important it would be to have each party cooperating to accomplish things.
What the stimulus bill being passed did was prove that each party approving of the bill didn't matter. The republicans opposed to the bill were shut out of the meeting, and did not have any input in what the bill contained, and could not stop it from being passed. This is where party politics has failed. Each party is not represented, meaning half of Americans are not represented. With one party not being allowed to even participate the party system has not accomplished its purpose, and certainly Obama has failed at bi-partisanship.
Article-Obama's tainted Win

Decentralization and Party Politcs

In the United States we think of party politics as being 2 main parties, but it is so much more. There are so many different views a person can have, and it is nearly impossible for each person to be completely represented. People are different all across the country, have their own opinions, and what this does is decentralize these parties, and almost creates completely different parties. What this then leads to is members of a given party being less loyal to a major party, therefore making that party less effective. With less effectiveness each party will struggle to strive towards their goals, and much of the agenda will not be met all because the party is not strong enough. So with people crossing party lines and not fully backing those people of their party they have weakened their party, and left them struggling. President Obama pushing for this "reaching across the isle", party politics lose what they have stood for, and lose the loyalty of their members. So many people are praising those who crossover the party lines and join with a new party, but is that what their voters really wanted them to do. Many times if you voted for somebody you have voted for their party as much as the person, and expect them to back their party and remain loyal to that party. Throughout the entire process of the previous election we heard about bipartisanship, and how important it would be in the coming years to get things accomplished. But where does it leave the party in that situation? Parties are left useless when crossing the isle occurs, which makes me wonder who the leaders of the parties are, and what are their jobs.
Here is the link that i posted earlier in the post. It talks about how people are excited that republicans are backing the stimulus plan, and praises them from crossing over, but where does it leave the rest of their party, that which they were elected because of. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/02/08/liberal-group-praises-crossover-republicans-minority-leaders-balk-partisanship/

The Stimulus Bill

For so many reasons this Stimulus bill is ridiculous. Passing it is a huge mistake, and many people, that are so blinded by the President and his charm, will not realize it for 2 more years. The reason is because that is when all of this money proposed to be given to all the amazingly dumb things it will be used for, such as an amazing amount for over the top building repairs that could be put on hold for now. Not only that but 2 years from now we will have pulled ourselves out of this recession and picked back up on our feet, only to have all this money finally be handed out causing an amazing amount of inflation, great idea. And many have read in multiple newspapers how the Milwaukee school district is about to get 90 million dollars, and for what to close more school buildings, and fire more teachers. I am not against providing money for education, I shouldn't be I want to become a teacher, but 90 million for a school district in shambles and with no future plans?
This was not supposed to ramble on about education, but more the medical end of the stimulus bill, which is so long that nobody really recognizes all the provisions that are contained in it. Throughout the article so many things need to be thought about again. All with doctors all giving same health care based on certain guidelines, and possibly fearing going overboard, nobody will benefit. Also giving more money to hospitals than to soldiers fighting a war to keep this country safe and free, as well as other countries safe and free. So many things about this bill just don't add up, if President Obama thinks not passing could lead to disaster wait till we see the disaster that could come from passing it as is. If the parties want to come together they need to come together and make changes to the stimulus plan. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_mccaughey&sid=aLzfDxfbwhzs