Does the Media Help Discern Votes?

In 2008, widely respected columnist Stuart Taylor writes: "one reason that candidates get away with dishonest campaign ads and speeches may be that it is so hard for undecided voters like me to discern which charges are true, which are exaggerated, and which are false. Most people can't spend hours every day cross-checking diverse sources of information to verify the accuracy of slanted stories and broadcasts." Perhaps it is true that slanted stories and broadcasts do exist, and indeed those instances provide great difficulty in discerning who to vote for.  However, one must take into account that while the media is the direct liaison between the government and the people, there are three sides to every story.  In this case, its the media's story, the government's story, and the truth.  See this video on various coverage of political issues covered by various media sources.  

Some may view the media as a paper shredder in the way that the flow of information is parallel to a sheet of paper, that paper is sent through the shredder (the media in this case) and fed in pieces to the public.  However, some may view the media as a phenomenon that involves human beings; human beings who have their own political beliefs.  There is no doubt that some outlets of media are more or less conservative than others.  However, what comes into question is how much the media should be relied upon in deciding the elections by way of the popular vote.  

In viewing this graph, specifically looking at Rick Perry, between positive and negative feedback, 52% of viewers expressed feedback to him based on news coverage from May-October.  If this graph is completely true, in viewing the statistics of all of the major candidates (those who have higher poll ratings), the news alone is a major player in the tone people have for the candidates.  With so much influence on the public, it is no wonder that so many are skeptical of the news.  Perhaps it is beneficial to do research and finding graphs and videos such as those above in this blog in an effort to fact check and find the most accurate information as possible.  While it is widely believed there is no way to tell what is happening within the hierarchy of the government without being within the hierarchy of the government,   as a democratic nation we must vote.  If it is the media that provides us with the most tools to find the preferred candidate, it becomes our duty as citizens to discern the coverage we believe to be true over the false ones in order to discern our vote for the best Presidential candidate.  

Perry's Struggle With The Media

Presidential Candidate Rick Perry like many of the current and past Presidential candidates has come under fire by way of the media.  According to Maggie Haberman of Politico.com, in an effort to win the Republican nomination, Perry has had to defend himself for not being conservative enough to the conservative media.  He has been accused of being soft on immigration issues and that is enough to have deprived him of the title of "the most right-winged" candidate in the race.  This video below will include a brief discussion of these accusations, specifically about immigrations office, as well as provided a small clip of Perry defending himself against such claims.

Perry, along with the conservative media, have called his remarks in debates regarding issues of immigration "over-compassionate."  Perry was sure to defend himself by recognizing his blatant over-compassion on such an issue.  Being compassionate has proven to be a weakening factor in Republican debates and justifiably so.  Really, does America really want a compassionate leader?

Perhaps Perry has read the history books regarding past Presidential candidates and their struggles with the media and he just may be trying to learn from them.  For example, another candidate aiming for the White House who was under fire for by the media was Richard Nixon.  Nixon ran unsuccessfully for President in 1960 losing by a small margin to John F. Kennedy, and than ran unsuccessfully for Governor of California in 1962.  After two consecutive losses, Nixon at that time bitterly announced his exit from politics.  Specifically addressing the media, Nixon shouted "...you won't have a Nixon to kick around anymore."  That was true for a short time until the Watergate scandal.  Point and case, Nixon and the media did not exactly have a "lackluster" relationship.  In regards to the media, perhaps Perry is under the impression that if he can't beat them, he may as well be with them.  In the overall grand scheme of the road to the White House, perhaps Perry is just playing his cards correctly in a game that requires much strategy.  The obvious strategy here would be influencing the media to emphasize his "right wingedness" in an effort to influence the people to vote for him.  Granted the media may place a spin on things, and can at times distribute "questionable" material, perhaps this story should end with a campaign ad from Rick Perry.  Established, said, and paid for by Rick Perry and his people, perhaps this piece of cinematic magic will be efficient enough in showing the people who the ultimate right wing candidate is.

Jon Huntsman on Foreign Policy

Former Utah Governer and Republican presidential candidate Jon Huntsman takes his stance on foreign policy. He explains a 5-prong foreign policy plan.  This includes rebuilding the U.S. economy, expansion of trade agreetments, increased counter-terrorism efforts, strengthening of relations with major world powers, and decreasing drug violence in Mexico and Latin America.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood speaks about Congressional struggles with the federal budget and the effects of those struggles on the transportation industry and the jobs in that industry.  He explains that the political platforms in which these Congressmen are arguing on behalf have resulted in a lack of jobs and efficiency in the transportation industry.

Protests Relevant to Election

Matthew Segal speaks about the protesters of Occupy Wall Street.  What has come in to question, is how the issues being addressed on Occupy Wall Street correlate with the issues of party platforms, and moreover, how these issues will be relevant in the 2012 election. In this video segmant, a clip of Bill Clinton on the Dave Letterman show with his view of such questions.

The Pizza Godfather and his Attempt to "Whack" Abortion

As of recently, I have found myself continually writing about Herman Cain.  To me, he is quite intriguing. Even more intriguing, are the numbers, which show him to be highly regarded by the GOP.  In fact, the GOP has praised the candidate for his desire for a radical reform in taxes, and his plainspoken tone of voice.  However, the media has not been so soft on Cain, claiming that "he had better get serious."  While opinions of the CEO of Godfather's pizza have been running rampant as of late, his approval nonetheless amongst his party has remained consistent.  However, it was not his 9-9-9 plan nor his accusation of blacks being "brainwashed" or "racist" that caught my attention.  It was his latest interview with Piers Morgan of CNN yesterday regarding his stance on abortion.  Here is a portion of that interview:

My analysis of this video is as follows: Huh?  That is right, I am confused Mr. Cain.  When asked if one of his female children and or grandchildren had been raped and impregnated, would he wish for the baby to come to life, he said "two separate issues."  Mr. Cain, while you have been praised for your plainspoken style, it has become apparent that you may lack the capacity to answer a question.  Is Herman Cain pro-choice or pro-life? According to this video, that would depend whether or not the circumstances involved his family or not.  Perhaps if he gets elected to the White House, he can flip a coin.

Further on in this interview, Cain explained, "As to my political policy view on abortion, I am 100% pro-life.  End of story.  I will appoint judges who understand the original intent of the Constitution.  Judges who are committed to the rule of law know that the Constitution contains no right to take the life of unborn children.  I will oppose government funding of abortion.  I will veto any legislation that contains funds for Planned Parenthood.  I will do everything that a President can do, consistent with his constitutional role, to advance the culture of life."  Mr. Cain says end of story.  Here is a hypothetical story to think about Mr. Cain.  A young women has been raped and she is now pregnant.  In addition to her now not legally able to give up her child, the new 9-9-9 tax reform plan has been enacted and now she must pay an extra 9% on her income that will support her child.   So I end this story with a question: Mr. Cain, how do you plan to advance the culture of her life?

Political Party Platforms

For 167 years political party platforms have stated the aims and principles of political parties.  On May 1, 1844, the Whig Party Platform of 1844 advocated for the election of Henry Clay for President of the United States based on the fact that he was the best representative to carry out the political agenda of the then Whig Party.  See the very first political party platform below:

WHIG PARTY PLATFORM OF 1844

Resolved, That, in presenting to the country the names of Henry Clay for president, and of Theodore Frelinghuysen for vice-president of the United States, this Convention is actuated by the conviction that all the great principles of the Whig party—principles inseparable from the public honor and prosperity—will be maintained and advanced by these candidates.

Resolved, That these principles may be summed as comprising, a well-regulated currency; a tariff for revenue to defray the necessary expenses of the government, and discriminating with special reference to the protection of the domestic labor of the country; the distribution of the proceeds of the sales of the public lands; a single term for the presidency; a reform of executive usurpations;—and, generally—such an administration of the affairs of the country as shall impart to every branch of the public service the greatest practicable efficiency, controlled by a well regulated and wise economy.

Resolved, That the name of Henry Clay needs no eulogy; the history of the country since his first appearance in public life is his history; its brightest pages of prosperity and success are identified with the principles which he has upheld, as its darkest and more disastrous pages are with every material departure in our public policy from those principles.

Resolved, That in Theodore Frelinghuysen we present a man pledged alike by his revolutionary ancestry and his own public course to every measure calculated to sustain the honor and interest of the country. Inheriting the principles as well as the name of a father who, with Washington, on the fields of Trenton and of Monmouth, perilled life in the contest for liberty, and afterwards, as a senator of the United States, acted with Washington in establishing and perpetuating that liberty, Theodore Frelinghuysen, by his course as Attorney-General of the State of New Jersey for twelve years, and subsequently as a senator of the United States for several years, was always strenuous on the side of law, order, and the constitution, while as a private man, his head, his hand, and his heart have been given without stint to the cause of morals, education, philanthropy, and religion.

Today, our great nation holds its elections on the ideological foundations of two major parties using political party platforms.  As time has continued on, not only has the language of these documented platforms evolved, but the issues as well.  Additional issues that did not exist during the 1800's such as social security, immigration, abortion, and energy make for great debate in the long process of electing officials in the United States.  This contrast can be seen in the 2008 Democratic Party Platform, which occurred on August 25, 2008.  See the contrast in the language and agendas below in this passage from the platform:

2008 DEMOCRATIC PARTY PLATFORM

We will start by renewing the American Dream for a new era – with the same new hope and new ideas that propelled Franklin Delano Roosevelt towards the New Deal and John F. Kennedy to the New Frontier. We will provide immediate relief to working people who have lost their jobs, families who are in danger of losing their homes, and those who – no matter how hard they work – are seeing prices go up more than their income. We will invest in America again –in world-class public education, in our infrastructure, and in green technology –so that our economy can generate the good, high-paying jobs of the future. We will end the outrage of unaffordable, unavailable health care, protect Social Security, and help Americans save for retirement. And we will harness American ingenuity to free this nation from the tyranny of oil.

While the context and substance of these platforms have evolved, they still serve the same purpose and that is to state the aims and agendas of political parties.  Regardless of the fact that today there exists major divide between the Democrats and Republicans, the more important issue is that there is a divide amongst members of the same party.  Therefore, it is essential to have these platforms to give candidates amongst the same party the opportunity to debate their differences in such a manner that the best candidate is chosen to represent their party.