Hillary Clinton's Victory

The New York Times columnist David Brooks calls it “the greatest political shock of our lifetime.” At the end of August, it seemed as though Donald Trump was destined to fail in his bid to become the 45th President of the United States. After months of new revelations of sexual harassments and use of vulgar language, spectators of the political sport were almost certain that Secretary Clinton would win, and then that fateful day came. Everyone, including some of Donald Trump’s most ardent supporters were shocked at the outcome of the election, leaving many to ask how such a thing could happen. While still shocking, ideas and concepts learned in the Election the President seminar have helped to explain the process, the results, and even the candidates themselves.

On November 8, 2016 the US election took place. The two front runners, the Democratic nominee Hilary Clinton and the Republican nominee, Donald Trump went neck to neck in the presidential race. On this frightening night, millions of people watched America’s worst nightmare unfold right in front of their own eyes. Donald J. Trump the islamophobic, xenophobic, misogynistic, homophobic, sexist, racist bigot defeated Hilary Clinton and became the 45th President of the United States of America. Donald Trump shouldn’t have even been nominated to run for president.

November 8, 2016. As the clock ticked from day to dust, the American population sat down to the conclusion of the forty fifth presidential election. Within moments, the fate of the nation was broadcasted into the homes and hearts of millions. For the some, the results of the election bought upon a sense of joy and excitement. However, for the other half of America’s citizens, hearing the call for Trump to presidency emitted feelings of sadness, disappointment, and above all else, confusion. How did a multi-billionaire businessman defeat a former First Lady of the United States and Secretary of State to become the president on the United States? In fact, how did a man of such little constitutional knowledge obtain the amount of political attention

Trump’s win was mainly because he appealed more with white working class voters in the Pennsylvania and the Midwest. Trumps speeches where very relatable to these voters. No matter what he spoke on. Whether it was on hoe America trades and spends money outside the U.S versus spending our money with our people, Hillary’s venal actions within her

“The Limit of Trumpism,” discusses how Trump’s agenda has kept him in the presidential election. Many have tried to follow his agendas but have caused them to lose the primaries. The article also demonstrates the limits to Trump. The biggest fault Trump has is reaching minorities. Instead of trying to entice minorities he is bashing immigrants. The author believes that this area of ignorance is causing Trump to lose in the polls.

This presidential election is gearing up to be one of the most if not the most interesting, and strange presidential election in the history of the United States of America. In addition, both Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton are not very loved by the American people. Many individuals feel as if Clinton is a rotten liar and should be in federal prison, and on the other hand many Americans are scared of trump and his ideologies. Sadly, one of them will win the race to the White House, unless something shady occurs. Nevertheless, candidates always make mistakes during their campaigns; sometimes costly mistakes. Though many political scientists have been in favor of Clinton winning this election, there four costly mistakes she can make that can cost her the election. As a matter of fact, she’s currently makes those mistakes.

Everything was fun and games, that is, until the American people––through the Electoral College––managed to pick the over-tanned, misogynistic, xenophobic buffoon. As such, the question arises: how exactly did Hillary Clinton, being one of the most qualified candidates to ever run for president, lose the election? Was hatred of Hillary the true

On November 3, 2016 in Berwyn, Pennsylvania our soon to be First Lady, Melania Trump, gave a speech addressing her past along with her hopes for the future of the United States. Over the past two years, political figures have been debating and campaigning for who would become America’s 45th President. As the candidates filtered down to Hilary Clinton, the Democratic nominee, and Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, the amount of rallies held to gain their supporters’ votes grew in abundance. Days prior to the Election Night, Melania Trump delivered her speech in hopes of gaining the votes of citizens who had not yet decided. Throughout this paper I will discus how the theory of ethos is used across Mrs. Trump’s speech to work for and against her.

Bush and Clinton, despite starting off shaky, blossomed into a lifelong friendship. Their upbringings were poles apart. W. Bush was the son of a former president, while Clinton was known for being a draft-dodger; yet, Bush did not become involved in politics until the age of 40 whereas Clinton was a governor at 32. While Bush had been devastated when Clinton beat his father in 1992, he first began to lambaste Clinton during the 2000 presidential campaign. Using the Lewinsky scandal as a vehicle to condemn the Clinton presidency as a whole, Bush ran on the promise of a “restoration of Republican rule” (Duffy and Gibbs 460). Despite the tumults of the initial recount crisis in Florida, after Supreme Court involvement, Bush was declared the winner of the election. Bush and Clinton were briefly brought together by 9/11, yet soon drawn apart by the public's accusation of both being soft on Bin Laden. It would later manifest itself into a father-son relationship, but only after the involvement of H.W. Bush. First, we examine the biological father-son relationship: H.W. Bush and W.

Trump’s victory surprised many experts and pollsters who had predicted Clinton would come out on top. The results of the election poll also favored Clinton. She won that vote 6,893 to 3,540. One of Trump’s main challenges was to persuade voters that he has the attitude, knowledge, and judgment to be president. He was able to attract more than enough voters to his side. However, Clinton appeared to have won the

The media has been and always will be the main source for news and information about any issue, namely the Presidential Election. The way media portrays a candidate can affect how the nation views them as a whole, but different media sources portray a candidate differently based upon their audience and who owns them. Clinton’s portrayal in the media can differ greatly from source to source. In sources with conservative heavy audiences like Fox she is looked down upon and unfavorable comparisons are made while in sources with liberal heavy audiences like the Atlantic she is both defended and questioned. This essay will compare three different articles from three different sources which will be NPR, Fox, and the Atlantic.

First, the demographics that then candidate Trump pursued. White-working class, through the campaign candidate Trump often state that the working class was suffering severely under then President Obama and that would be the same with Hilary Clinton as president would the very same if not worst. Candidate Trump's constant trips though the Rustbelt and Midwest states that he heavy sot the so-called Reagan democrats and union works. As many people believed that the current administration was not doing it's job to help nurture

From the time he road down the golden escalator at Trump tower and announced his run for president in front of a room of paid actors, Donald Trump run for president had been treated like a joke and he became the punchline on every late night show and joke I told with my friends and family until November 8 when he was elected president, which came as a surprise to me and most of the country. This Trump upset however didn't come out of nowhere, In this article I will explain how economic inequality and anger from the white working class that propelled Trump to win the republican nomination, the demographic shifts that created anxiety amongst white voters, the voters who were secretly supporting trump, but too afraid to tell pollsters, the spread

Donald Trump was elected president of the United States of America on November 8th, 2016, and now has been running our country for over a year. As Trump’s first year in office slowly began, his reputation seems to be creating different outside views of our nation and arguments started producing everywhere. After competing with Hillary Clinton for the presidential term in office, Trump defeated her along with her democratic supporters causing one of the most shocking elections in U.S. history. Using public media web pages, we are reviewing both sides of the argument regarding Trump’s election and we are going to decipher why each arguer supports their side, and why each side is reasonable for the benefit of our country.

One of the factors that made election observers skeptical about the prospects of an NLD sweep at the polls was the campaign mounted by nationalist monks affiliated with MaBaTha to paint the opposition as the “party of Islamists” and incapable of or unwilling to sufficiently protect Myanmar’s Buddhist heritage. This, combined with influential MaBaTha monks’ explicit endorsement of current President Thein Sein and the ruling USDP, was expected to erode popular support for the NLD. As we now know, the religious nationalist arguments did not exert nearly the influence on people’s voting as many had worried. But what does this apparent defeat mean for MaBaTha and similar groups moving forward? Opinion among analysts seems to be somewhat divided.