Why the American Presidency is a Joke

So, last night the republican nominee, Donald Trump, was elected in to presidency.  The fact that a person with no political experience whatsoever can win the presidency means that there is something wrong with American politics.  American politics is a joke because we have lost all regards for the other party, and we refuse to talk about problems that are at hand.

The first problem with american politics is that we have seem to lost all care and regard for the other parties wants, and needs. We have lost the ability to say, "Ok, I want these three things, and you want these three things.  How can we work together to make it happen?" In american politics now, the candidates only seem to care about their own parties needs and wants, and not on what is the best for the country.


The second problem with american politics, is that it has turned into a massive reality TV show.  The fact that some one with out political experience can even think about running for president, (and win at that!) should not be able to happen.  Candidates are no longer talking about how we can fix our country, but now talking about how he or she done not "look" fit to run the country.  We no longer talking about the economy, or the housing crisis, but we have digressed to mindless discussion on topic that are not important at the time.

American politics has many flaws and problems with it, too many to bring up now.  I feel with some strong change, we will be able to change the system for the better, and make sure that all parties needs are met.

Pathos in Politics

What is clearly shown in the presidential debates in this year's election that contrast traditional professionalism is each candidates use of pathos. Both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were well known prior to this election, Clinton was the first lady and Secretary of State as Trump stared on Reality T.V and sponsors beauty pageants. Never the less, this reputation they each hold is their opponents first target. Hateful ads and slogans are thrown at each other, phrases like 'Love Trumps Hate' and 'Trump That B*tch may be completely different but both are just jabbing one another.

This is my problem with modern politics, the unnecessary insults and hatred thrown from each political party towards the other. The feud between Democrats and Republicans has gone to the extreme, people are stereotyped and reprimanded for picking the 'wrong' side. In the most recent debates between Clinton and Trump some extremely important questions were not answered. Instead, Trump brought up the email scandal and Clinton exposed Trump on being the sexist and racist person we already knew he was. There is so much destruction and hate in this world right now, and these presidential debates are meant for each candidate to share their plans to fix everything. So many citizens, especially younger people, are still undecided because it's unclear what side Trump and Clinton are taking. At this point, I could care less about what happened to those emails and the 'locker room' talk. I care about how to handle the wage gap, abortion laws, immigration, and every other form of oppression still here today. There is too much pathos in politics, and not enough logos in this election. 

The Best Quote Of The Third Debate

"Let's please be quiet, for the candidates and the American people"

This quote was uttered somewhat exasperatedly from tonight's debate moderator, Chris Wallace. He actually did a much better job than the past two debate moderators at a few things. Wallace kept the audience in line, the few times they threatened a cacophony of boos or laughs, shut them down very quickly. The first time the audience even gave so much as a collective thought to yelling out, Wallace said "Let's please be quiet, for the candidates and the American people." Most of the time, and he was consistent with it throughout the debate, he told (mostly) Trump and Clinton that they had to shut up when their speaking times passed, as hard as that is for them to do.

Trump's Harassment of Women: Live Blog

On the topic of the women that Trump allegedly harassed, Trump claims that the stories are "debunked" and that all 9 women who came forth are lying. He even goes as far to share that he did not apologize to his wife for the incidents that have been occurring because he claims that they did not happen. As this is a tall claim to make, I believe it is statistically unlikely that all 9 women who came forth are only interested in the fame that it will bring them. Hillary argues that Trump is unfit to run this country because he belittles women to make himself bigger, going after their dignity and their self-worth. I agree that anyone who does not recognize gender equality is not prepared to run the United States of America.

Building the Economy: Live Post

Under Obama, the economic debt has grown to 20 trillion dollars, which will only increase under Hillary's tax plan, which is to massively raise taxes on Americans. Trump's argument to facilitate economic growth is the best option because he plans to ask other wealthy countries to help America, something that Hillary is reluctant to do. Trump, as well, recognizes that we have horrible deals in America, and jobs are being sucked out of the economy. Trump plans to renegotiate NAFTA, and if that does not work, he will create new deals. This will work because Trump is a great businessman and as he cuts taxes on businesses, they will hire more people, improving the economy, which will in turn "get the economy rolling".

Trump vs. Clinton Final Debate, part 2

Trump has come a long way since the first debate in terms of respecting the mic, but he could not seem to help himself when arguing with Clinton about immigration. Trump interrupted Clinton more than once- he said that she was wrong and that she has been known to be a liar. He spoke over the mediator and over Clinton. This type of rhetoric does not appeal to anyone because it's rude and does not get any point across.

Scare Rhetoric:Láqueo rhetoric

Hillary digs at Donald for using "scare rhetoric" with his word choice when talking about late term abortions. She reprimands him logos, his character, by saying this, mentioning a few other times that his language is representative of his character (not great, she says). It will be interesting to see how many times she might cite his language throughout the night, and vice versa.

Hindsight is not always 20/20 Live Post

On the issue of immigration Donald Trump attempts to change the record of his opinions by saying that what he said in the past was something else. He even goes as far to say that what Hillary Clinton has said and done in the past is something else. The very attempt to change the record of what people have said or done is insulting in my opinion. To speak on the assumption that people will just believe your every word is crazy.

Building the Wall: Live Post

It is brought up that Hillary voted for the wall the be built in 2006, however it did not happen. Hillary argues how her opinion on the wall has changed since then because border control as well as the deportation of undocumented immigrants requires that we focus all our efforts on the issue of illegal immigrants when they could be better spent elsewhere. Hillary suggests a more democratic option called her comprehensive immigration reform policy, which attempts to bring undocumented immigrants out of the shadows to get economy working again and decrease exploitation by employers. I think Hillary's option is a better alternative because it will not tear families apart, nor punish people for coming to America in the hope of a better life.

Trump vs. Clinton Final Debate, part 1

When talking about the right to choose, Trump and Clinton use logos and pathos to defend their views. Clinton uses facts about the Roe vs. Wade to state that a mother should be able to have an abortion late in the term if the mother's health is considered. The facts and logic she uses are defended by Trump using pathos, saying that Clinton would allow someone to "rip the baby out" in the ninth month of a pregnancy. Trump's diction exaggerates and twists Clinton's words.

Hillary v. Donald: ROUND 3

The introductions were as they usually are, both candidates were introduced and the rules and goals for the debate states. This time, like in the second debate, did not shake hands. This time, they both made a beeline for their podium, not even crossing paths or standing next to one another. This could very well set the tone for the debate, although with these two candidates, the formality of the debate can soon be lost. So far, so good.

Pence v.s. Kaine

I personally thought Tim Kaine won this vice presidential debate.

Mike Pence, much like Donald Trump, seemed unprepared and on edge during the debate. I thought that both Pence and Trump were having trouble in their debates controlling their anger/emotions, and seemed to be letting their opponent get the better of them. Kaine and Clinton seem to have found that sitting back and letting the other man talk is a solid strategy.

Furthermore, Pence and Trump did not seem to be on the same page. You could tell Pence was really struggling to justify Trump's actions, and he ended up hurting himself because he was not able to give a solid stance. Kaine was giving him a hard time, and he couldn't defend himself.

I think Donald Trump and Mike Pence will, themselves, be the ones responsible for losing the election, if they keep going like this.

Second Presidential Debate: Are Any of Us Winners?

The second Presidential Debate did not go particularly well for either candidate, nor did it reveal anything about the candidates that U.S. citizens weren’t already aware of. However, the way that the candidates handled themselves and answered questions said a lot about the values of American citizens.

Although many people believe that Hillary lost her head- and- shoulders lead over Trump in this debate, I think she proved that she had learned from the first debate that Trump will end up digging himself into a hole if she just lets him talk and does not interrupt. Her lack of interruptions also served as a way to make up for her Vice President, Tim Kaine who, in the Vice Presidential debate, lost his composure and interrupted Mike Pence many times. Hillary reestablished her party’s and her own debate integrity and respect for the process.

Once again, Trump had questionable body language and aggressive and reckless debate tactics. While Hillary was answering questions, Trump paced back and forth along the back of the stage like a lion stalking his prey. It ended up benefiting Hillary because it showed how well she could keep her composure in weird situations. While Trump was antsy and distracting during her questions, Hillary made an effort to make occasional eye contact and still make the audience feel as though they were being addressed.

One of the most questionable things Trump did for the second debate was his stunt of holding a pre-debate news conference with a handful of women allegedly assaulted by Bill Clinton. Exploiting the stories of the women to get people riled up before a debate is disrespectful and takes attention away from the actual problem of their situation. The uncovering of these stories should not be brought about to squash an opponent, it should be brought about to get justice for the women that were assaulted. It is a serious situation, not a debate tool.

From even lightly following the debates and overall Presidential election, most Americans have picked up on Hillary’s strong debate skills and Trump’s awkward body language and aggression. Americans’ reactions to these things and the debate in general say a lot about where we are as a country. The fact that Trump believed that he would be able to use the stories of women assaulted by Bill Clinton as “hook” to get people on his side and watching the debate shows how Americans are more focused on the drama than the actual policies of the candidates. Not that sexual assault isn’t something that should be openly and widely discussed, but at this point in the election process, a debate should be more focused on policies and ideas than family drama and personal attacks.

In a recent speech, President Obama said, “Democracy in a big, diverse country doesn’t work if you constantly demonize each other.” No candidate is getting anywhere in their campaign by commenting on the physical appearance or stability of the marriage of the other candidate. Americans should start placing more value on the person with the best and most inclusive policies instead of the one that can dig up the most dirt on the opposing candidate.

Hillary likes Pant Suits and Equality

On Hillary’s shop website, she sells a shirt that has a line of rainbow paint suits going across the front. This is one of my favorite shirts of her campaign so far because it shows how good of a sport and how focused Hillary’s campaign remains.

Instead of being frustrated by the constant comments being made about her attire when those same comments are never made about male candidates, she embraces them and jokes about it herself. By making jokes about her frequent wearing of pant suits she is making it realized that it is not a big deal and that it shouldn’t be a focus of the election. It is just something light-hearted and funny and has nothing to do with whether or not she “looks presidential”.

The rainbow pattern of the pantsuits brought all of the joking back to ideas that actually matter. Straying from the typical red, white, and blue of campaign shirts and making the shirt rainbow represent the inclusiveness and support of LGBTQ+ community that is a large part of Hillary’s campaign. Without getting deep into policies, one of the the most appealing things about Hillary, that Trump lacks, is her acceptance of people of all sexualities and identities. As as we get closer and closer to election day, it is important for her to emphasize these ideas so that undecided voters can realize that, putting all other policies aside, being accepting and inclusive is what matters most in the leader of our country.

Kaine vs. Pence

The 2016 Vice Presidential debate is off to a strong start. Tim Kaine, VP candidate to Hillary Clinton is up against Donald Trump's pick, Mike Pence. Both men seem to have a good idea of what they're talking about, and have already established themselves as much more mature and respectful to one another than their presidential counter parts. I like the pathos that both of the men used when talking about police and race relations in America. Both Pence and Kaine agreed with each other with certain aspects of the problem, and by using emotion to connect with the audience and voters, they were able to find common ground. 

Hillary Clinton's Debate Skills May Have Cost Her a Social Win

This week's presidential debate was a show like no other. Clinton was composed, calm, almost cocky in her extreme confidence of her debate skills. Trump was the exact opposite; uncivilized, brash, and floundering in his attempt to fit the mold of a proper debater. Lester Holt just seemed tired. The amount of informality in the debate was incredibly surprising, and I have no doubt this debate will go down in a history book somewhere. What result will be reported?

Chances are, people will look back on this and say that Hillary Clinton won. Clearly, she blew Trump completely out of the water with her refined arguments and practically perfected debate skills. Her claims were supported, for the most part, by sound evidence and she refuted his claims with ease. Trump, on the other hand, failed to behave with an ounce of formality and his arguments and evidence were disappointing at best. Had this been a graded presentation in a class, Clinton would have passed with flying colors while Trump would've scraped by with a 3% for effort. 

However, this debate is a real life event with real life repercussions. Debate skills only make up half the criteria for a win - the other half is how well the candidate was received. Clinton and Trump were speaking to very difference audiences in this debate, and Trump managed to make his failure to argue into a successful connection with his main voting block. These are the kinds of people who support him because "he's not afraid to speak his mind" and "he says what needs to be said, when it needs to be said". They support him because he is uncivil, brash, and frantic. He doesn't wait to form an eloquent argument and present it in due time. He drops out his truth in the moment, even though it may not be accurate or appropriate.

Hillary, on the other hand, is on paper-thin ice. Trump's slogan of "Crooked Hillary" is reflected by many minority Democrats as well as conservative Republicans who feel as though Hillary will not represent them and that she will manipulate the presidency in an ultimately harmful manner. She needs to do everything she possibly can to convince them that she will not bend truth in order to get her point. 

Yet, during this debate, she made several rash statements that fact checkers proved false, which is far more devastating to her than anything else Trump did. Being rude and incorrect is expected and even encouraged from him. It's part of his brand. But for Hillary, every slip up is a few more votes taken away because her years of political and diplomatic experience is useless in the face of a wrong fact in the eyes of many. She's a liar, proven here plain and simple, they say. She can't be trusted with the Presidency. 

Though Clinton's experience clearly outweighs Trump's in every way, shape, or form; her audience is prone to be far more skeptical and nit-picky of every minuscule mistake she makes. Trump's audience thrives on him being uncivil and unprepared because it gives him a "more genuine" sense. Hillary's confidence in this debate may have been enough to convince her audience that she is trustworthy; but more likely than not Trump will receive praise for his sub-par performance, while Clinton will receive backlash for her fantastic one. Social response to this debate may very well reverse the academic analysis that Hillary was the clear winner and give Trump an advantage and even greater support from his crowd.

Presidential Debate Performances

As the dawn of new leadership is a mere two months from its tremendously anticipated arrival, each facet of even the slightest utterances and actions of both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have been, and are to be analyzed and compared to a flawlessly meticulous extent. As such attention was drawn to Monday's commencement of the first of a series of presidential debates between the two candidates, Clinton's several arguments were, evidently, of considerably greater substance and merit than those of Trump.

It became apparent to me that Monday evening's debate began to wane in proven and relevant material as time progressed. Both Trump and Clinton, in several areas, abandoned their arguments entirely in order to assert a claim of incorrectness regarding the opposing candidate. A great deal of Hillary's ambitious jabs at Trump were, more often than not, provable and well applicable to the subject of debate, which frequently acknowledged the invalidity of points argued by Trump to be truthful or worthy of general acceptance. Contrarily, Trump's resentful swings at Hillary were often given motion by unsubstantiated gossip, most often regarding Clinton's E-Mails, her personal characteristics of which deviated far from her capability to perform adequately as president, along with several references made to the previous wrongdoings and shortcomings of her husband, most of which being either unverifiable or lacking in relevance and effectiveness to his claim. Upon the grounds of argumentative strength, material, and pertinence, Hillary Clinton has successfully achieved, in this particular instance, a position of advantage. 

In conclusion, although both candidates were indeed blameworthy of numerous digressions from the direction of the debate to separate extents, Hillary's tended to manifested a semi-consistent standard of which conformed to valuable and notably potent information to each of the few subjects explored during this segment of the presidential debates.