Anarchism In The 2016 Election

Her mother surprised, amused, and dragged her family into her capers so often that for a moment Dillard may have believed her. Dillard also employs dialogue within her piece to depict her mother’s intellectual mind. Dillard recalls a moment after school in which she comes home and announces, “Eisenhower’s going to win.” Lowering her magazine and looking her in the eyes her mother proceeded to ask in what way she knew this fact, Dillard describes, “I was doomed. It was fatal to say, ‘Everyone says so.’

The mother is unsympathetic to Blacks and the Civil Rights Movement. She reminds Julian commonly about his incredible granddad who was the representative and "had an estate and two hundred slaves," then he helps her to

In the article of David Sedaris “Undecided”, he is very critical about the unsure voters in the American elections. For Sedaris, these undecided voters are usually the ones who have a decisive vote in an election without knowing who they voted for. His mother didn´t have any political knowledge and rely on David to vote for a candidate for her. Sedaris compares the election with choosing what to eat. If you were offered chicken or a platter of broken glass in it, which one would you choose? For him is not confusing, candidates are very different from each other, so it is ridiculous to be undecided. The percentage of people in the United States that are undecided or do not vote is big, but even that, I believe we have a very active voting population.

1-11) Annie Dillard is an American author born in 1945 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Claiming no religion as her own, she attended Hollins University where she began writing prose and poetry under the guidance of her writing professor, and later husband, R H W Dillard. Her first book, a collection of poems entitled Tickets for a Prayer Wheel, was published in 1974 and details her quest for spiritual knowledge, a reoccurring theme in her works. Her most famous work was published soon after, Pilgrim at Tinker Creek. She was awarded the 1975 Pulitzer Prize for General Nonfiction for her work. Her other famous works include Holy the Firm, An American Childhood, The Writing Life, The Living, and The Maytrees. She is currently married to historical

Campaigns in politics are important in determining outcomes and inform the voters who remain undecided. Also, campaigns matter because although the candidates or media officials may know what the outcome will be, the voters themselves do not (107). Aside from campaigns, conventions are also important, if not more important. Party nominating conventions affect the apathetic, uninterested electorates who think conventions are interesting and exciting, often known as the Olympic games of politics (121). This experience for voters can carry influence, and is a time of “intense political learning” (129). Therefore, aggregately, conventions make public opinion meaningful because the citizens who watch make an informed decision about a candidate, and have facts about why they will vote for that candidate. The chief reason why individual public opinion is meaningless during presidential elections is the “nonattitudes.” Nonattitudes are survey responses made up on the spot during an interview by a respondent who has no attitude on politics (113). Therefore, these individuals diminish the value of public opinion because we hate inconsistency and this creates an abundance of views on issues. However, during election night, exit polls support why aggregate opinion is also important. Exit polls are meaningful because one hundred percent of those leaving the polls have voted (102). Therefore, we can get real results from the electorates and this makes collective public opinion

When George Washington was elected President in 1789 by members of the fledgling United States of America, he was setting into motion a tradition that has stood the test of over 225 years - the presidential election. Even as the United States has seen dozens of wars, made hundreds of scientific advances, and selected thousands of politicians to seats everywhere from small town councils to Congress, the principles of the election have remained the same; the people band together to determine who will best protect their interests at home and assure that the US will always remain on top in foreign policy. Oftentimes, this is found to be a difficult decision, as public opinion is constantly wavering. One sees this in action particularly during the 1992 election - a battle of wills between Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush, and Ross Perot; complete with lead changes, major vote swings, and Perot’s unprecedented initial success - ultimately a false alarm to the bipartisan establishment.

Ida Tarbell, “one of the first "muckrakers," as they came to be called, agreed that journalists should strive for truth” (Satter). Tarbell would not write an article or a book even unless every fact or note in that article or book was the absolute truth; and making sure that everything was perfect. On the job, “she perfected her keen attention to detail. Tarbell remembered worrying, ‘What if the accent was in the wrong place? What if I brought somebody into the world in the wrong year’” (Satter)? Additionally, Tarbell had different persuasive influences and one of them was her mother. “Another powerful influence on Ida was her mother. Esther often welcomed into the Tarbell home reformers working for women's rights” (Satter). Tarbell’s mother wanted her to see what these reformers did to fight for the independence of women. After Ida Tarbell met these reformers she had promised herself that she would avoid getting married and get a good education in which she enrolled in Allegheny College. Tarbell wanted to fight for women’s financial rights in which is where her mother has influenced

Her mother often lectured against conformity, but Dillard fails to analyze or fully understand them: “Torpid conformity was a kind of sin; it was stupidity itself, the mighty stream against which Mother would never cease to struggle” (Dillard 116). Dillard simply states her mother’s opinion, without any personal input. With only shallow writing, the audience is unable to connect with the author and her meaning. Some may argue that her use of logic allows the audience to comprehend her values; however, the audience’s comprehension from logic is extremely shallow compared to an understanding based on feeling. While the reader may understand why one may have certain values, he or she will not fully grasp how those values affect one’s actions or why those values have such an impact on one’s life. Mamaw showed her values and influenced Vance through non-verbal honesty. Her sacrifice spoke for her, unlike Dillard’s description of her mother. One author shows how effective people in his life were by presenting honest examples that do not necessarily portray him in a positive light while the author presents simple, superficial examples and fails to connect with her audience.

Fuller personifies what is wrong with the thoughts of people in nineteenth century society. She is a well-educated,

This is an announcement by Douglas where she denotes his mother. This exhibit an extreme poor character of so called slave holders and owners.

When the narrator mentions that her doctor wants her to lose weight to stabilize her blood pressure, implies the mother is not in good health. The narrator shows that the mother is disgusted with the society in her era, which African Americans roam free. In her opinion, she thinks they should be a lower class than her. Her signs of disgust are shown when she tells Julian of her Grandfather’s plantation after an African American man enters the bus with a newspaper. When the man sits down and reads, the mother exclaims to Julian that “Now you see why I won’t ride on these buses by myself” (O’Connor 452). She does “feel sorry for. . . the ones that are half white” (O’Connor 449), because they have no place to belong in society. She does get annoyed by her son’s behavior when he loosens his tie and asks the African American man for a match. Julian’s mother does have hope for Julian that he will become a writer and keeps reminding him that “Rome wasn’t built in a day” (O’Connor 448). She is so focused on her past that “she can’t comprehend that depth to which its loss has affected her, and she repeats the narrative in order to re-establish the historical boundaries of her identity” (Williamson 751). The narrator shows that she adores young African American children, even though, her son tries to warn her not to give a penny to the boy. After being punched by the African American mother, she is in shock and extreme confusion to why it happened. Wanting to go “Home” (O’Connor 457) where her grandfather’s plantation was, she immediately retreats to her historical fantasy

Jay Van Bavel’s 2016 article addresses an important and relevant issue: voters’ deeply divided perceptions of presidential candidates. According to Bavel, approximately 70 million viewers tuned in to watch the final presidential debate on October 19, 2016. In theory, one would be valid in assuming that while processing such an event, everyone should be experiencing the same reality—all are watching the same debate, hearing the same words said by the same people. Strangely, however, this is not the case: in reality, Republicans and Democrats concluded the debates with drastically separate conclusions on the candidates. According to a CNN poll referenced to within Bavel’s article, Hillary Clinton won the first debate, with 67% compared to Donald Trump’s 27%. However, a further examination of these statistics reveals an obvious divergence between the democratic and republican parties. According to democrats, Clinton won (89% to 5%); according to republicans, Trump won (54% to 28%). Why is there such a great divide when both parties were presented with the exact same information? People do not see the world objectively—without the influence of personal biases. Instead, people reinforce the goals and values of the partisan group they identify with, allowing the party’s views to color their perceptions of identical information (Bavel).

Annie Dillard grew up in a neighborhood, I would assume much like mine. Being a girl didn’t matter, having long hair and wearing dresses didn’t matter to her, but one might have grown up in different situation. When I was growing up, I had an older brother, Cameron, that is 10 years older than me. At the age of 18 he went off into the USMC and me, as an 8-year-old, didn’t really realize how brave he was. Cam spend 8 years in the Marines, and when he arrived home I realized how many boy AND girls had joined the military. Hearing stories from him made me realize that no matter

Mrs. Lincoln was raised in a wealthy, southern family (Baker 2002). Her family “represented the slaveholding gentry of a new community,” although she was uncomfortable with the southern slaveholding ways (Baker 2002). She lost her mother at the age of

Many political science researchers study the forces that drive the vote. One of the earliest, and most well known, books about election studies is The American Voter. Written in 1960, the book tries to explain a model that describes what drives Americans to vote the way they do. The model suggests that social factors determine ones party identification, which determines one's issue positions and evaluation of candidate's characteristics. These forces all work together to determine how one will vote. This model may or may not still hold true today, as political researchers are not in agreement as to what exactly drives the vote. One thing that does remain true, however, is that factors such as social groups, party identification, issues,