A big question during election year, Why should I vote? This year more than ever, for me. I am able to vote this year, which is the first time I can, but I'm torn. I want to vote but I know my vote won't even count.
Why do I say this? because this year the polls show that it will most likely be Donald Trump versus Hilary Clinton. Why do these people matter? Well I believe Trump will get a majority of public view, but in the electoral college he will not win, republicans will not let him, which means whether I vote for Trump or whatever democrat is selected then the democrat will win.
This is all speculation and isn't at all fact, it's my opinion, and it all hinges on Trump getting the nomination.
This does though bring up a good point, why a majority of people don't vote. This is caused by people like me who know our votes don't count. Those people don't want to vote because they know their votes don't count.
The government needs to get this through their skulls, the fact that the electoral college makes voters upset, this has been happening for a while now and it has made the public have a bad taste in their mouth and a negative connotation of the word government.
These are just my thoughts on the election this year and my thoughts on voting in general. If you have any suggestions you can leave them in the form of a comment below.
Friday, April 29, 2016
Friday, April 15, 2016
Lose Lose Situation By SK
In the Blog The Donkey And The Elephant By SK. Brings up a good point, about the election this year, and how the republicans are acting. I really enjoyed reading your work, very detailed and had a lot of logistics in it. I agree with you, it would be wrong for the Republicans to not support Donald Trump, even with all his flaws. I believe that what ever the public votes, and the electors who support them, should get the nomination, however I believe that if Trump wins the primary, he will either be asked to step down, or told to step down, and if he does not do that then the electors will flip parties to have a democrat in office then to let Trump win. Which is why I think we, as a country, should do away with the electoral college. This along with many other reasons is why it makes the public feel betrayed.
Friday, April 1, 2016
Don't Be So Hard On Your Big Brother, He Tries
"Don't Be So Hard On Your Big Brother, He Tries" your mom might have said to you if you were getting mad at something your big brother did or did not do that you thought was not right. I believe this is how we are supposed to treat the Government, with the idea that "they try". Now don't get me wrong I enjoy living in America, but the Government doesn't always do what we (the people) want. Look at the years of 2000, 1824, 1876, and 1880, all of those are presidential election years in which the majority of the people (that's us) voted for the candidate who lost.
What happened there? How could a popular vote not get elected? I thought the people voted for the president? These are some common questions asked by many people when you talk about these elections. See my theory, which may sound a bit conspiracy, is that the founding fathers did not really want to put that much power in the hands of everyday people, they wanted a small hand of people they could control to be able to really vote. This is why we (the people) don't get to vote for the president, we vote for electors, who we hope will vote for the president we want. But as you can see that does not always happen.
I don't mean to sound like a pessimist, as I said before I do enjoy living in America. But like most people I want answers, I want to know why the government hasn't changed. I want to know why the people don't have a say, and why the electors get all the power. I want to know why "big brother" doesn't want to hang out with me.
What happened there? How could a popular vote not get elected? I thought the people voted for the president? These are some common questions asked by many people when you talk about these elections. See my theory, which may sound a bit conspiracy, is that the founding fathers did not really want to put that much power in the hands of everyday people, they wanted a small hand of people they could control to be able to really vote. This is why we (the people) don't get to vote for the president, we vote for electors, who we hope will vote for the president we want. But as you can see that does not always happen.
I don't mean to sound like a pessimist, as I said before I do enjoy living in America. But like most people I want answers, I want to know why the government hasn't changed. I want to know why the people don't have a say, and why the electors get all the power. I want to know why "big brother" doesn't want to hang out with me.
Tuesday, February 23, 2016
Seeking iPhone Data, Through The Front Door
In the article "Seeking iPhone Data, Through The Front Door", by William J. Bratton and John J. Miller, they talk about how the FBI and Apple are debating over privacy rights. This Article is an opinion article, and was published on February 22, 2016, on The New York Times.
The biggest issue with this article is that there is no concrete evidence to back up any of the claims the authors are making. They claim that Apple, a cell phone company, doesn't want to protect the public from terrorist attacks, only hacking attacks, but offers no quotes from Apple of examples of them doing this, other than refusing to "open a backdoor" for the FBI. This makes the opinion article look very weak, as if they were kids on the playground pointing fingers at each other but eventually forget what the main problem was. The article has a sort of clunky way of moving through it, the authors jump from topic to topic with little to no transition. The article is fairly short, which makes the transitions very important. When I read the article it makes me want to pause and laugh, because I assume that the article was written shortly after finding out about the Apple FBI debate and the authors couldn't stop to take a break and think, they just had to write whatever was on their mind.
With all of this it makes this article, that is supposed to be an opinion paper, feel very weak. With little to no evidence, the way the authors use transitions, and the pure anger you can feel in the words, just make for a weak opinion article. With all of this I can't even being to make my own opinion on the debate, because there is so little evidence to back up their claim, that Apple doesn't care about terrorist attacks.
The biggest issue with this article is that there is no concrete evidence to back up any of the claims the authors are making. They claim that Apple, a cell phone company, doesn't want to protect the public from terrorist attacks, only hacking attacks, but offers no quotes from Apple of examples of them doing this, other than refusing to "open a backdoor" for the FBI. This makes the opinion article look very weak, as if they were kids on the playground pointing fingers at each other but eventually forget what the main problem was. The article has a sort of clunky way of moving through it, the authors jump from topic to topic with little to no transition. The article is fairly short, which makes the transitions very important. When I read the article it makes me want to pause and laugh, because I assume that the article was written shortly after finding out about the Apple FBI debate and the authors couldn't stop to take a break and think, they just had to write whatever was on their mind.
With all of this it makes this article, that is supposed to be an opinion paper, feel very weak. With little to no evidence, the way the authors use transitions, and the pure anger you can feel in the words, just make for a weak opinion article. With all of this I can't even being to make my own opinion on the debate, because there is so little evidence to back up their claim, that Apple doesn't care about terrorist attacks.
Tuesday, February 9, 2016
5 Things To Consider in the NH Primary
The US presidential election is coming up, and the primary is just around the corner, but as we know the main public has very little knowledge on these matters. So how do we change that? asked CNN writer Stephen Collinson. What is the answer, to give the top 5 things to be looking at in the NH primary.
Yes we can not vote in NH, as we are in TX, but it is still a big deal to watch and see how the election is going, to see what the presidential candidates are saying. This article is a very short, but very informing article. It gives five different things to watch in the NH primary. The first is labeled "Trump's Biggest Test", and in this section Collinson explains that Donald Trump has a big question to answer,"Can he turn big crowds and media buzz into votes?", Collinson theorizes that if Trump's voting percentage drops lower than 31% than he might lose the election all together, due to the inability to gain momentum in the latter part of the race. The second section is titled "Rubio: Rebound or rout?" the theory in this section is that if Marco Rubio doesn't hold traction after the debate he will then fall shortly after this primary. The third section is titled "How hot is Bern", in this Collinson talks about Bernie Sanders and even claims that the question isn't will Sanders win, but by how much. Then Collinson talks about the Governors Ball, titled "Who stars at the Governors Ball" in this section Collinson talks about all the governors who have fallen out of the race after the last primary, but Collinson theorizes that Bush will get the highest percent of votes, out of all the remaining Governors. The last section is labeled "The Fallout", in this Collinson talks about how he thinks that the NH primary will not have many people drop out, but instead will be a defining moment for most candidates for the coming up primaries.
Yes we can not vote in NH, as we are in TX, but it is still a big deal to watch and see how the election is going, to see what the presidential candidates are saying. This article is a very short, but very informing article. It gives five different things to watch in the NH primary. The first is labeled "Trump's Biggest Test", and in this section Collinson explains that Donald Trump has a big question to answer,"Can he turn big crowds and media buzz into votes?", Collinson theorizes that if Trump's voting percentage drops lower than 31% than he might lose the election all together, due to the inability to gain momentum in the latter part of the race. The second section is titled "Rubio: Rebound or rout?" the theory in this section is that if Marco Rubio doesn't hold traction after the debate he will then fall shortly after this primary. The third section is titled "How hot is Bern", in this Collinson talks about Bernie Sanders and even claims that the question isn't will Sanders win, but by how much. Then Collinson talks about the Governors Ball, titled "Who stars at the Governors Ball" in this section Collinson talks about all the governors who have fallen out of the race after the last primary, but Collinson theorizes that Bush will get the highest percent of votes, out of all the remaining Governors. The last section is labeled "The Fallout", in this Collinson talks about how he thinks that the NH primary will not have many people drop out, but instead will be a defining moment for most candidates for the coming up primaries.
Tuesday, January 26, 2016
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)