CE Week #8: “On the Fence: A Voter’s Guide To the 2008 Election”
By Mark Halperin
We know. Baseball playoffs have only just begun. You’ve barely thought about Thanksgiving, yet it’s time to start figuring out whom to support for President. The recent announcement that Iowa voters plan to caucus while college-football bowl games are still being played in the first week of January just increases the odds that party nominees may be selected before most of the country has even tuned in. That’s a problem, with the stakes so high in a country unsettled by war and so many untested–and still unfamiliar–candidates. A recent Time poll shows Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton leading their respective competitors nationally, but the race is still wide open. Bill Clinton has described campaigning for President as a job interview, with an application process consisting of unrelenting media scrutiny and a grueling coast-to-coast gauntlet of events and debates. Here we present the top-tier finalists for the job.
Go to the AP GO PO website under 2008 Presidential Race. Open the 2008 Voter’s Guide to get the rest of the details on this article.
The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://pkautzman.edublogs.org/2007/10/21/129/trackback/
“On The Fence” was a very fun and easy read. Halperin breaks down important information and lays it all out so that an eight year old could follow it and make a reasonable decision about who they are going to support in the next presidential election. Although it is pretty basic stuff that will leave most voters on the fence where they started, it can still be helpful. But this is a good thing because it is definitely better to make an important decision such as this after soaking in all of the information available, and this article does not provide great detail in the least. Since we know how politically unintelligent so many Americans are, most can use the article as a useful baby step in the right direction. On the other hand, the section of the very easy to follow table that includes “What You Don’t Know About Them” is a complete waste of space. I am not “interviewing” these candidates to find the perfect best friend. I really don’t care what kind of junk food the leader of my country is addicted to. I have given up trying to understand why everyone else actually does.
I liked this article for several reasons. First, it was pretty easy to read it. It also had some funny parts. Also, I liked how at the end they threw in some stuff about what we might not know about the candidates like Mitt Romney’s favorite dessert is pie even though it is really of no importance. For some reason things are easier to read when they’re set out on a table or graph. It really didn’t go into details though. This article had some bad parts too. Every category was just a very quick summary of some of the candidate’s thoughts, beliefs, and how they run things (and pie) This would definitely be a great read for an 18 year old or someone who is new to politics and voting. I wouldn’t recommend this to anyone who is familiar with the candidates and their positions because it would just be a waste of time, unless you like to know what your favorite candidate eats for dessert.
I’m not too sure about this one… as stef said the article was fairly “fun and [an] easy read,” but the thing is it really doesn’t give very much useful information about the candidates. Most of the information provided is fairly simple and/or uninformative. I’d say the first two rows for each candidate are somewhat helpful because they list each of the candidate’s signature issues and beliefs. However, even this section seems to be biased against at least Hilary because it repeats the experience part to show that she doesn’t really take much of a stance on many issues. The rest of the rows are just junk about what could or might happen as well as useless information about their “childhood memories,” that all seems pretty repetitive. Although I think Stef is right about this being a “baby step in the right direction,” I also feel that someone could’ve come up with a little bit bigger of a step that maybe listed in a little more detail each of the candidates positions. This way people could see outright exactly what seems to fit their own beliefs. The biggest problem with my idea is that candidates rarely do have any specific position they take on any issue because they would rather appeal to more voters who might not exactly see them eye to eye. I find it somewhat amusing when the article chooses to say that the quote in Fred Thomson’s yearbook was “The lazier a man is, the more he plans to do tomorrow,” after it already said his liabilities include the perception that he is lazy and unprepared. Other than that statement I think I completely agree with Stef that the “What You Don’t Know About Them” is an absolute waste of space because it really doesn’t have anything to do with politics and no one should care about that sort of thing.
I agree with both Anthony and Stefanie on the fact that this article was very easy read and easy to follow. I liked how the chart laid out all the candidates and different things like their slogans and signature issues. Another thing about the categories that I liked was the sections that said “what they have” and “what they need” I also like how it had pictures of the candidates to match names with faces. I already knew who almost all the candidates were but there were a couple that I couldn’t put a face too, such as John Edwards. Like Anthony said I liked how they put in little facts about the candidates. I thought it was cool that Rudi Giuliani’s most memorable childhood memory was playing baseball and going to watch baseball games. Over all I thought that this was really interesting and easy enough to understand that my little brother could have made sense of it. – Matt Powles