Perception 's Configuration Of Reality : 45th Presidential Debate

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.

In Brian Resnick’s "How Politics Breaks Our Brains, and How We Can Put Them Back Together" Resnick talks about what, scientifically, makes us bias and prone to partisanship. He explores and evaluates many studies on the subject throughout the article to better explain his point. He talks about how difficult it is to change ones views because our “us versus them” (1) mindset, and how we can fix it.

We hold debates between the Republican and Democrats before the primaries, and then we hold debates between the two remaining presidential candidates. Upon first glance it may appear that the presidential debates are held to get to know the candidate’s positions on the various issues that are important to the American people; however, the format of the debates make it difficult to accomplish that task. Instead, it is more plausible that these debates are held in order to discover what the candidates are like personally because the debates provide ample opportunities for us to discover the candidate’s values. Ultimately, we want to find out the values that these potential presidents have because we want someone we trust to lead the

Many Americans are aware of the polarization that exists within them and within the government. However, people do not realize the extent of the polarization and the effect that it has on government functions. Susan Page, author of “Divided We Now Stand” explains that many Americans are aware of the increasing polarization, when a political party influences the stance of a person, and that citizens believe that polarization influence politicians more than it influence them. However, Page argues that voters are to blame as well. She uses a survey to illustrate the choices that Americans make on a certain policy. The results of the survey show that Democrats and Republicans choose the stance of their political party, regardless of their own personal opinions on the actual policy (Page). Page’s point proves that politicians are not the only ones that contribute to the government’s dysfunction, and that voters might want to re-evaluate how they process their information and their choices if they wish to see a change.

Robert J. Samuelson’s essay, “Picking Sides for the News,” details the problem of citizens only hearing the news that they want to hear through statistics. Samuelson begins his essay by giving the reader the opinion of Americans in regards to news being reported. He goes on to say that Americans are increasingly choosing to listen to news based on “partisanship,” meaning conservatives listen to Republican news and liberals listen to Democratic news. Samuelson highlights the fact that most Americans are starting to not believe what they hear in the news, partisan growth resulting because of the distrust. Samuelson concludes his essay by describing why the reader should care. He believes the reader should care because the media’s bias’ are shaping

Partisanship is defined in The American Voter “as both a set of beliefs and feelings that culminate in a sense of “psychological attachment” to a political party. It is one of the most important factors affecting the American political system. It explains, to some extent, vote choice, political engagement, partisan reasoning, and the influence of partisan elites. This definition generates two competing views of partisanship, the instrumental and expressive perspectives. This debate is what

The 2016 election is one of the most controversial Presidential races the United States has seen. One reason for this is the increased polarity of the country towards a specific political party. However, members of the parties may not all support the same candidate.For example, Donald Trump has been denounced for “insufficient conservatism” by members of his own party (Breitbart 1). Yet he is still running on the Republican ticket and will receive the votes of the majority of Republicans, simply because he is the Republican candidate, even though many Republicans (leaders and voters) do not support him.

It all starts October 2016, when the data from the polls shows that three of the presidential candidates are running neck-in-neck, and there are 10% of people undecided. Starting with the public opinion which is a person’s attitude or preference on a particular issue such as a political issue, political event, and political leaders. The values of the people which are their principles that form their political opinion could also be a part in their choosing of a presidential candidate. This leads into the peoples’ party affiliation, if they see themselves leaning towards one party they are more likely to vote for the candidate who is running within those party lines. There are so many explanations as to why this poll could be getting the results that it is.

In a democracy citizens are to hold elected officials accountable for their actions in order to ensure delegates are doing what is expected of them. American citizens seem to be living well off enough that they are callous when considering the large problems that other citizens face. A lack in sympathy between citizens conjoined with contradicting social and religious views has created a retrenchment of followership in America. In order for political leaders to gather a large following, their followers must unite over some type of idea imperative in their lives. Unfortunately, Americans report a growing rancor between Democrats and Republicans according to the pew research center, with more than twice as many party members reporting members of the opposite party as unfavorable in 2014 than in 1994. The bipartisan divide has led political leaders to only be able to amass small followings amongst members of their

Every person may not have the same level of these components, but it is present. Everyone will not know everything about the candidate they plan to vote for, they only know the high points of their campaign. According to the LA TIMES “It's a rare voter who carefully reads a candidate's position papers on every conceivable topic. Instead, we typically vote based on a candidate's stance on a subset of topics, assuming there will be a certain consistency on other topics…Another conscious component of political decision-making is voting for experience or competence, rather than a platform. This is so common that one study found that candidates judged to look more competent had won elections 68% of the time.” (Sapolsky) Especially, with how the media reports news about a particular candidate, they only report the parts of the campaign that the public would consider controversial. This bias also depends on the news station you are choosing to watch because the news reported is often swayed to reflect the views of a certain political party. For example, FOX NEWS is known for having republican views, MSNBC is known for having liberal views, and CNN is known for having democratic views. The question now becomes what is the threshold of irrationality, bias, ignorance or immoral belief that deems someone as a bad

Did you know that every president that america had so far came from the united states? In all the years that the Presidential debate has be going on more and more people from different countries and since then won or lost. Would you want to have a president from a different country? I would want a president from a different country. I think that it would be better if we had the chance to expand our presidential line. People from all around the world would like the chance to have the experience of becoming the United States President.

Wherever your political allegiance may lie, you cannot possibly doubt that this has been a very turbulent election season. The two leading candidates -- Donald Trump (R) and Hillary Clinton (D) -- have risen to the top, defying all expectations along the way. Trump managed to surpass 16 rival Republicans despite (or even because of) no real political experience and countless offensive remarks. Clinton, meanwhile, has inched out past Trump despite numerous scandals and suspicious connections. Yet even with these obstacles overcame, they remain two of the most reviled candidates in U.S. history, even amongst their own parties. Many voters have been demoralized by this outcome, but rest assured, there is always a third option. That option comes in the form of

One may be making a virtuous decision when choosing the lesser of two evils, but one will still find himself stuck with an evil choice. Many Americans today find themselves in this predicament when considering the only two real possible choices for President of the United States. On one hand, voters have former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who the Federal Bureau of Investigations labeled “careless” and “grossly negligent” in the handling of America 's top secret information. On the other hand, voters have Donald Trump, who persistently attacked a Gold Star Family. It is easy to see how the Pew Research Center has reported that there is widespread skepticism among registered voters concerning the presidential race. The poll reported that a higher percentage of voters thought that both candidates would make “terrible presidents” rather than merely “average presidents’”(Pew Poll, August 2016). Americans are very unhappy with their two choices for President of the United States. The three main reasons behind this dissatisfaction are increasing negative partisanship, media 's constant push of a narrative to appeal to their base, and the overall qualities of the candidates themselves.

After what has felt like an eternity, the embarrassment that was the 2016 Presidential Election has finally come to a discouraging conclusion, with Republican candidate Donald Trump shocking the world and defeating his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton. This has left a bittersweet taste in the mouth of many Americans, and after constantly being told to choose between the lesser of two evils, I believe this whole process has given us an important message: the duopoly of American politics isn’t working for us anymore.