voting experience

As a first time voter, voting was unlike any other experience I have ever had. I had voted in past local elections, but always by absentee ballot. I don't really know what I expected, but waiting in line for two hours to be in a voting booth for 3 seconds was not what I had in mind. So here's what happened...I arrived at my voting place at 2:45pm. I had a meeting that I was running at 4:30 and thought I was leaving myself enough time. Wrong. I waited until 4:26. At this point I was in line to actually vote. I was in the building and had already signed my name on the paper when I realized that I was going to have to leave. I asked one of the women directing traffic if I would be allowed back on the voting line if I came back later since I had already signed in: "Well, I'm not sure. I don't know if I'll be here then, and I don't want to tell you yes and then have you have to wait again later". I explained that I had to leave regardless and I just wanted to be able to vote. "Come with me," she whispered and pulled me across the room. "Act sick; look like your going to pass out. Excuse me, this girl feels ill she can't stand anymore. She's going to pass out. Can she vote?" With that I was lightly shoved into the voting booth, cast my ballot, and power walked out the building to my meeting. It was interesting to say the least.

I ended up making a decision about who I was voting for the night before election day. I decided to vote for McCain. I had a feeling Obama would win the election. I actually think that he is very qualified and is probably better for the country then McCain would be given the current situation. Why didn't I vote for him then? McCain is the better man for my family. I've always been a parent pleaser, and I couldn't not vote for him knowing how strongly my parents felt about Obama's tax plan. Overall, 'm happy with the way the election turned out. I support Obama and wish him luck in pulling this country out of economic crisis and toward a brighter future. I think that his original narrative of hope still rings true.

Ba"rock" the vote

Over the weekend a video appeared on CNNBC depicting the day after the election with Obama having lost by a single vote. This site allows people to customize the video with their friends' names and e-mail them the link. The name will appear in the video as the lone voter who forgot to go out and vote for Obama. The concept of losing by a single vote has been a real topic of interest. Over the summer a movie called "Swing Vote" played in theaters telling the story of an election year that comes down to one vote. One man's vote will determine the next U.S. President: "Suddenly, Bud Johnson, the nobody, becomes the voice for everybody when the world realizes that his vote will be the one that elects the next president." Bud Johnson sounds like Joe the Plumber.
Does the country really have to "fear" Obama not getting elected tomorrow? If our system works, and votes matter, and the majority is for Obama, wouldn't logic conclude Obama will be elected? This video was meant to encourage people to actually get out and vote; supporting a candidate means nothing if you don't vote for them. It will be interesting to see actual voter turnout at elections tomorrow.

is change possible?

After watching a series of videos in class last week of clips of political speeches, I left feeling discouraged about the history of our nation versus where we could potentially be headed after this year's election. Each of the speakers referenced the tough times the nation was currently facing. For example, Roosevelt mentioned the suffering economy, King spoke of hate and discrimination, and Obama talked of our current economic troubles. Throughout the last century, not much has really changed, or so it seems. We are currently experiencing the worst economic crisis this nation has seen since the Great Depression, and there are Americans who won't vote for a black man or a woman. Our country has come a long way, but many problems still exist. This makes me wonder: how realistic are promises for change from each Presidential candidate? Can either candidate pull us out of these tough times and put the United States in a truly better place in the future?
If you can't tell, I'm still undecided in this election. I'm actually a very indecisive person, and have recently been feeling a lot of anxiety about my inability to make a decision with only two days before the election. I don't even want to think about after the election and seeing the consequences of the nation's decision! This New York Times article was interesting to me especially, as I feel like I can connect with a couple of the people interviewed. Every time I feel like I am close to making a decision, I change my mind. I better decide before I enter the voting booth, or I may be in there for awhile.

If the world could vote...

Last Tuesday, a panel of foreign journalists spoke about how they felt their countries would vote in the United States Presidential election. This article from Lehigh's Brown & White highlights the general feeling of the panalists. Basically, if the world could vote, they would vote for Obama. Many foreigners believe that Obama has a better approach to foreign policy: he sees the world as countries needing to work together. A representative from Russia stated that Palin was a joke and that many Russians feel McCain would worsen the foreign policy situation.
Foreign interest in American politics is overwhelming considering many Americans have little interest in politics most of the time. In addition, a large majority of Americans are completely unaware of anything involving foreign policy and international politics. This video has nothing really to do with the election, but does show just how uneducated some Americans are. Being a superpower helps to explain why many people from other countries are so interested in American politics.
Obama's popularity has created high expectations from other countries and even people in the United States. If he is elected, he will be expected to make big changes. People are easily disappointed, and if he fails in the eyes of foreign ambassadors, other countries will continued to feel disgruntled toward the U.S. and our politics.

tax cut facts

I was watching TV and saw an advertisement supported by Obama for taxcutfacts.org. Since tax policies of the two candidates differ largely, and have been a main concern of mine during this campiagn, I wanted to check it out. The website redirects to http://taxcut.barackobama.com/. Here appears a tax calculator where you can enter in your information on annual income, dependents, age, dependents, etc. Then it calculates the tax cut you would receive under Obama versus McCain. After entering my parents' information, I received this message: "You will probably not get a tax cut under the Obama-Biden plan."
Obviously taxes are not the only important issue in this election. And what's best for my family, is not necessarily what's best for the country. I am not blind to the fact that trickle-down tax plans don't seem to be working for our economy. Not everyone who makes enough money to be cahritable is. The reality of the situation for my family is that we won't be able to afford our current lifestyle under Obama. We will have to make sacrafices. Since I plan on being dependent on my parents for another couple of years, this thought scares me. My parents both work extremely hard to give me and my sisters things they never had growing up. Under Obama's tax plan, some of those things would be taken away. I know I sound selfish, but my family has also been very generous to other people and organizations, something we not be able ot afford any more. This is really the main issue in my choosing a candidate.

Battleground PA

This video highlights the importance of Pennsylvania as a battleground state. With 21 electoral votes at stake, PA is an important state in this election. McCain is still determined that he will win Pennsylvania, despite Obama's lead in the polls. According to a New York Times article: "Losing Pennsylvania could undo any electoral gains Mr. Obama might make by winning over such longtime Republican states as Virginia, Colorado or Nevada." It is exciting to be allowed to cast my vote in such a crucial state.

McCain's campaign in the toilet?

Is McCain's campaign really going down the toilet? Calling on Joe the Plumber and attacking Obama through television advertisements have not been working for him lately. At this point it almost seems as if there is little else he could do to turn things around. I'm not saying he should publicly give up, that would reflect poorly, but I have started looking more closely at his strategy. In a swing-state like Pennsylvania, where the majority seems to be in favor of Obama, McCain has seemed to focus his efforts. The critical difference is that Pennsylvania contains some regions, such as Appalachia, that are primarily democratic, but have voted for McCain. Some Pennsylvania Democrats are keenly aware of race issues, the New York Times reported. There is a lot of uncertainty in the polls today. In addition, as the NY TImes article highlights, there may be "hidden resistance among whites to casting a ballot for an African-American". Taking the Bradley effect into account, the McCain campaign's Pennsylvania fixation becomes clearer. It is exciting to be allowed to vote is such a critical state, and it will be interesting to see what really happens on election day and if the polls correctly reflect voter turnout or not. Further, it is shocking to see that this underlying racism exists in our country. It is further surprising to see how it is largely subconscious. This is frightening because if people who are not outwardly racist, don't believe they have racist tendencies or thoughts, then nothing will be done to counteract those beliefs. It is at this point that beliefs turn into actions.

Halloween Political Cartoon

In light of the upcoming holiday, a time for tricks and treats, is this political cartoon. As a fiscally conservative person, I found the cartoon to be quite funny, but I hope that people can appreciate it regardless of party affiliation. On aspect of the cartoon that I disagree with, however, is the comment that othr kids are "too lazy". I certainly don't believe that people making less than $250,000 a year are lazy. Even people below the income poverty line are not lazy. It is important to remember how opportunity and ability come into play. I consider myself to be a charitable and giving person, but I believe that taxing people who make more money a higher percentage is unfair. Although these people may have had certain underlying advantages, they do not necessarily derserve to be taxed more for that reason.

Wardrobe woes for Palin

Palin and the McCain campaign have been receving a lot of criticism recently for Palin's wardrobe. We all know she looks good, but where does the money for her stylish wardrobe come from? The Republican National Convention of course. This NY Times article goes into detail about purchases to outfit Palin and her family. My interest is in how this influences her image and narrative. Palin is supposed to be the hockey mom - a woman other women and families can relate to across many levels and classes. "Party officials, who said they had discussed the matter with McCain and Palin advisers, said all concerned wanted Ms. Palin to present herself as a fashionable-but-sensible on-the-go working mother — a multilayered sartorial strategy, in other words, that has yielded an array of well-cut jackets and skirts, suitable for the different seasons and state climates", the article says. As a female, I am both proud and concerned with the image she is trying to create or the narrative her campaign is forming about her. Possibly more concerned. I think it's great that she is supposed to be the do it all woman, one who works and raises the kids, but this is a tough job to have. It is a common stuggle for women in today's working world: work of family. Many women feel they have to choose between settling down or advanicing in their career. Women are still discriminated against in the workforce. The fact that Palin is receiving extra attention and press because she is a women and being judged more on her appearance is also disconcerting. I am concerned that a male in this campaign would not be receiving the same criticism (in fact they haven't), and that wardrobe is rarely, if ever, part of a male candidate's narrative.

Obama not qualified to be President?

I came across this article and video online while searching for random information on the election. I watched the video and was shocked as a result. Phillip Berg, the lawyer in the video, claims that Obama is not a natural born U.S. citizen, and therefore, is not qualified to be President. I was not sure how credible this site is, so I checked out some other websites. I found similar information and claims on other websites. Lawsuits against Obama have been filed, but he has refused to produce any documentation to the courts. Apparently, two different versions of a birth certificate were submitted elctronically.
It is possible that Berg is completely wrong, but if so, then what is Obama hiding. The important point is that the Obama campaign has not chosen to confront Berg's claims in a straightforward manner. That is a fact. If Obama is a natural born citizen then his campaign could have submitted documentation to the court quashing this case. Instead, it has chosen to engage in a legal strategy of delay. Why would they do this if Obama's documentation were in order?

McCain's Narrative

"What campaigns peddle is not simply character but character as defined by story — a tale of opposing forces that in its telling will memorably establish what a given election is about." This quote from an upcoming Times Magazine article does a justice to the concept of narratives, which we began discussing at the start of the semester. This article takes a closer look at McCain's narrative and how it is different from the one he wrote at the beginning of the campaign season and in previous campaigns. "The selling of a presidential “narrative” the reigning buzz word of this election cycle has taken on outsize significance in an age in which a rush of visuals and catch words can cripple public images overnight." This quote highlights the importance of having a convincing narrative in today's media-driven world. Political advisors and speech writers try to make candidates seem in tune with the majority and responsive to changing circumstances. This makes developing"true character" in a candidate difficult.
The article goes into a lot of detail about how McCain's advisors and speechwriters have created his narrative. A patriotic war-hero promoting the surge in Iraq, a country-first bipartisan, a leader (not a celebrity), a team of mavericks, a fighter, John McCain's narratives reflect all these, changing with the times. All of these different narratives are designed to make voters feel a differnt way, allowing people to hopefully connect with McCain on some level. The narrative or story is interpreted by viewers and creates an image of the candidate. McCain has had several different images since the start of his campain in an attempt to resonate with several voters.
Whether or not these different narratives are working for McCain is the question. They are all interconnected, progressing as his campaign has, working Palin's narrative into his own. I guess only time will tell.

Joe the Plumber

In last night's debate, McCain referenced a "Joe the Plumber" from an encounter a man had with Obama on the campign trail. This man had stopped to ask Obama how he would be affected by his tax plan if he owned a small business that made more than $250,000 per year. McCain used this segment to capitalize on the idea that Obama's plan will raise taxes and that speading the wealth around will not make everyone better off.
This article from The Morning Call features a video showing the incident that became a highlight of Wednesday night's debate. This man has become an instant celebrity due to the mention of his name at the debate. Simply because he asked a question, he has received scrutiny and media attention that he did not ask for. This NY Times article goes into further detail.
This brings me back to our class discussions on the role of the media. Realistically "Joe the Plumber" will not be in the news for long, but what got him in the news in the first place? It also makes it seem like the media's job is to "dig up dirt" on everyone who is to be in the news. Joe the Plumber clearly had no intention of letting people know that he did not have a liscence or had fallen behind in paying his taxes when he stopped to ask Obama that question.
People should not have to worry about losing their annonymity and reaching celebrity status, even if only briefly, simply by taking initiative and becoming involved in politics.

abortion

This topic came up in tonight's Presidential debate. It is a pressing issue on which the two candidates have very different opinions. Different types of abortion were mentioned, letting people know it's a truly complicated issue. McCain believes that Roe v. Wade should be overturned; while, Obama believes that banning abortion would be unconstitutional. This New York Times page highlights the stance that each candidate takes on this important issue. The issue is complicated...when, if ever, is the right time to decide to take away a baby's chance at life? What scenarios come into consideration? Rape, the health conditions of the mother, or just a high school student are all considered. Also, what are the consequences of the Roe v. Wade decision and how would overturning this decision change things? All of these are important questions.
Abortion is a method of intervention. Rather than arguing over how to fix the "problem" once it occurs, government shuold take a preventative role. Obama mentioned during the debate that proper sex education programs shuold be put in place. Both candidates realize that preventing unwanted pregnancies is an important step, but neither think that it's the first step. More prevention programs need to be incorporated into education and earlier on. Today, more and more children are exposed to information on TV and the internet that raises a lot questions that go unanswered. Prevention is the key to dealing with the issue of abortion in the future.

food for thought

This sound-bite worries me because it reflects that a large portion of uneducated Americans will be voting in this year's election. The Howard Stern Show tested a "rumor" that black people are only voting for Obama because he is black. They did this by asking blacks in Harlem if they agreed with Obama's policies on certain issues, but actually described policies of McCain. They even went as far as asking if they were happy with Obama's choice of Sarah Palin as the Vice Presidential canditate. The people being asked said yes!
I was shocked that people could be so uninformed. Obviously, this is not true of all Americans, but these people will be voting in the election. People voting for candidates for seemingly arbitrary reasons happens all the time. These people in Harlem find Obama to be more relatable than McCain. They can connect with him, but have no knowledge of what he stands for.
This is worrisome because after the past eight years it is important for voters to be able to make informed decisions about who will be the next President.

Bar Stool Economics

Another joke from dad...also timely...

Bar Stool Economics
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that’s what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. “Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.” Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men—the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?They realised that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.“I only got a dollar out of the $20,”declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, “But he got $10!”“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I did!”“That’s true!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!”“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison, “we didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!”The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up any more. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

Nonpartisan Joke

My dad sends me e-mails on a daily basis, usually stories, pictures, or jokes. Today I received this "Nonpartisan Joke":
THIS IS A NONPARTISAN JOKE THAT CAN BE ENJOYED BY BOTH PARTIES! NOT ONLY THAT, it is POLITICALLY CORRECT!!.......and so timely!

While walking down the street one day a US senator is tragically hit by a truck and dies. His soul arrives in heaven and is met by St. Peter at the entrance. 'Welcome to heaven,' says St. Peter. 'Before you settle in, it seems there is a problem. We seldom see a high official around these parts, you see, so we're not sure what to do with you.' 'No problem, just let me in,' says the senator. 'Well, I'd like to, but I have orders from higher up. What we'll do is have you spend one day in hell and one in heaven. Then you can choose where to spend eternity.' 'Really, I've made up my mind. I want to be in heaven,' says the senator. 'I'm sorry, but we have our rules.' And with that, St. Peter escorts him to the elevator and he goes down, down, down to hell. The doors open and he finds himself in the middle of a green golf course. In the distance is a clubhouse and standing in front of it are all his friends and other politicians who had worked with him. Everyone is very happy and in evening dress. They run to greet him, shake his hand, and reminisce about the good times they had while getting rich at the expense of the people. They play a friendly game of golf an d then dine on lobster, caviar and champagne. Also present is the devil, who really is a very friendly guy who has a good time dancing and telling jokes. They are having such a good time that before he realizes it, it is time to go. Everyone gives him a hearty farewell and waves while the elevator rises . The elevator goes up, up, up and the door reopens on heaven where St. Peter is waiting for him. 'Now it's time to visit heaven.' So, 24 hours pass with the senator joining a group of contented souls moving from cloud to cloud, playing the harp and singing. They have a good time and, before he realizes it, the 24 hours have gone by and St. Peter returns. 'Well, then, you've spent a day in hell and another in heaven. Now choose your eternity.' The senator reflects for a minut e, then answers: 'Well, I would never have said it before, I mean heaven has been delightful, but I think I would be better off in hell.' So St. Peter escorts him to the elevator and he goes down, down, down to hell. Now the doors of the elevator open and he's in the middle of a barren land covered with waste and garbage. He sees all his friends, dressed in rags, picking up the trash and putting it in black bags as more trash falls from above... The devil comes over to him and puts his arm around his shoulder. 'I don't understand,' stammers the senator. 'Yesterday I was here and there was a golf course and clubhouse, and we ate lobster and caviar, drank champagne, and danced and had a great time. Now there's just a wasteland full of garbage and my friends look miserable. What happened?' The devil looks at him, smiles and says....... 'Yesterday we were campaigning. Today you voted.'

While this joke is funny, I think it also reflects one crucial aspect of this year's election: change. People really feel that change is coming. Regardless of who are next President is, the country will see many changes; however, what changes occur will differ drastically depending on who is elected. Other important questions are also indirectly related to this joke. For example, what promises have candidates made that they won't be able to keep? And how will their plans to help the economy really work, if at all? The imperative questions are on the minds of all Americans.

Town-Hall Debate

I liked the style of the town hall debate and found it to be more insightful into each candidate's plans and main concerns. Obviously, the people are aware of the current situation in America - financial crisis and economic collapse - as it was clearly conveyed in the questions from the audience and those submitted online. What was also clear during the debate was the differing opinions of Obama and McCain on how to deal with the current economic situation. This NYT article summarizes key points from the debate. Neither had an optimistic view, and both tried their best to empathize with the American people. As mentioned in class today, Americans have tended to turn toward the democrat in times of financial crisis. I think that Obama comes across as the leader with the skills to tackle the problems seen in today's economy. On the other hand, he focuses so much on middle class Americans, that he fails to point out that everyone is suffering. McCain seems to address all Americans when connecting with their hardship.

Leadership

After today's activity and class discussion, I was primed to pay attention to leadership among the Vice Presidential candidates in tonight's debate. Both candidates realize the current situation, that of economic crisis, and strived to connect with middle class voters. Both were asked what they would do as Vice President, but neither really answered the question. I was particularly surprised, yet excited when each candidate was asked what they would do if either Presidential candidate were to die in office. I thought this question would be insightful as to the differences between the VP candidates and their presidential counterparts. Biden stated that he would continue to uphold Obama's beliefs and polices. As VP, Biden will sit in on all meetings with Obama and be there to provide his opinion and advice. Biden seems like particularly stong leader, one who isn't always willing to take the back seat, but in this case I believe that he is aware of his role as VP and would be okay with Obama having the final say. Palin, on the other hand, was more willing to state that she and McCain did disagree on some issues. She mentioned trying to convince McCain of her view on certain topics and stated that she was given the lead on certain issues, such as policies relating to special needs children. Palin seemed to turn questions throughout the debate back to herself and her own experience as governer in Alaska. Although, she did constantly refer to herself and McCain as a team of mavericks. Clearly there are major differnces between the two candidates ideas of leadership, but it was interesting to see that they were still able to put other issues aside and applaude eachother for their achievements when appropriate.

taxes

This weekend I was home, and inevitably the election came up in discussion between myself and my parents. I am still having a hard time making a decision about which candidate to support in this election. It seems as if every time I am about to choose a side, I have a conversation that puts me back on the fence. This is exactly what happened when talking to my parents. Obviously the current economy is putting a lot of added financial stress on Americans. It is not easy putting three daughters through college and soon graduate school for eight years in a row with no financial aid. This conversation prompted me to look into both candiates' tax policies to see how my family would be affected.
If Obama is elected, my family would be forced to pay higher taxes than they are paying now, a real financial burden: "Those high-income groups would see their top two income tax rates revert to 36% and 39.6% from 33% and 35% respectively. And their capital gains and dividend tax rates would also revert to 20% from 15%." My family would definitely be better off under McCain's tax plan.
This brings up a lot of other fundamental issues surrounding the role government. Should it allow for a Robin Hood type leader, one who steals from the rich to give to the poor? Or should people who make more money be allowed to spend it as they please and hopefully be charitable as they see fit.
Sociology also comes into play. All people are not created equal. Some are born with more opportunities than others. Still other people work extemely hard to be able able to afford the a certain standard of living. These are all difficult issues that are making it hard for me to choose a candidate this election cycle.

Child Welfare

Children's issues have long been an important issue for me. In the past, I have had internships for non-profit organizations that deal with child welfare and have been opened up to all the problems that exist in this country for those dependent on adults. This article talks about the importance of both candidates taking a stand on children's issues. The United States is the only place among developed nations not to have ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of a Child (UNCROC). This committee protects the rights of children in many scenarios such as poverty, abuse and negect, healthcare and education. While candiates have indicated that they want better education and healthcare coverage for children, neither has taken a stance on other important issues affecting children. This link will allow you to sign a petition asking the candidates to ratify the UNCROC. Make a difference in the life of children in America!

Ad Wars

Walking by the newspaper stand, a particular article in Friday edition of The Morning Call caught my eye. AD WARS: Campaigning Through Commercials. Since we had just been talking about the role of the media the previous class, I decided to read the article. Since this is a local paper, the article refers specifically to the ads aired in Pennsylvania. The campaigns spent a combined $2.6 million in Pennsylvania alone in the week following the major parties' conventions (McCain: $1,621,000 and Obama:$948,000). These ads ran 1,800 times. A letup in the ad wars is not expected due to the importance of winning Pennsylvania. These ads continue to attack the opposition and draw attention to the current state of the economy.
I found the last line of the article, a quote from Governor Ed Rendell, to be quite compelling. He said, "There is so much free media that you can put an ad on for a day or two and have an impact that is fairly lasting...You are seeing ads roll over in incredible time periods". This insight points to the changes that have occurred in advertising in general. Ads only need to air once before they are posted on YouTube or played over on talk shows. This makes me wonder where the millions of dollars that candidates spend on advertising goes if so much free media is available? And could this money be better spent?
The answer to the second question I'm sure is yes. If people worked as hard to raise money for other causes as they do for campaign ads this country could be a better place.

Economic Policy

Among other differences, Obama and McCain both seem to have rather different ideas when it comes to Economic Policy. McCain pushes for lower taxes and a limited role of the government (one that stands on your side, not in your way). Obama, on the other hand, is taking a social policy approach: rebuild infrastructure and invest in energy technology.
Today, the “fundamental problem” in the real economy referred to in this article is that people have been treating rising asset prices as a substitute for personal savings. In other words, in the past, people had been relying on the rising value of their homes or increasing value of their stocks instead of setting aside extra income. Since asset prices have not been rising much lately, people will need more savings for retirement or in case of emergency.
This underlying “structural deficiency” has caused three secondary problems to become more apparent. First, the aging population in America is growing. A large population is about to enter the years during which they have expected to spend their retirement savings. Since more savings are now needed, the transition may take longer than expected. The current credit crisis is a second problem that the American economy is facing. Banks are trying to raise more capital and lend out fewer loans, but that does not mean that capital is being allocated efficiently. Thirdly, the American economy will undergo some shifts, from consumption to investment, due to lower consumer spending. This may be beneficial in the long-run, but in the short-run it translates to lost jobs and costly readjustments. If people begin saving more, this will have an effect on consumption (it will decrease in the short-run).
The article suggests that policymakers should focus on regulatory reform that is forward-looking, avoiding further fiscal stimulus in the form of tax rebates, which will push consumers to spend, rather than save. This will only bolster the economy in the short-run, postponing needed adjustments..
Back to McCain v. Obama...which plan is better? who's right? McCain proposes to increase regulation for financial markets, extend tax cuts on individuals, and cut the corporate rate. Obama, on the other hand, plans to invest in infrastructure development and energy technology. He also plans to extend tax cuts, but only for people making less than $250,000 and certain interest groups like students, seniors, mortgage owners, and low-income workers, and savers. Obama would raise the capital gains tax and some corporate taxes. There are striking differences in the way the two candidates would apportion the tax burden: people earning more than $1 million would pay $58,000 less in taxes than they do now under McCain, but $247,000 more in taxes under Obama. Both candidates plan to cut taxes, which the article warns against. Obama, on the other hand, does plan on investing in energy markets, which the article suggests would be beneficial. With each candidate, it's estimated that about $4 trillion will be added to the national debt. Neither candidate can claim to be a budget balancer.

dirty, rotten politics

For as long as I can remember my family has been involved in politics. When I was six years old, my dad was elected mayor of my hometown, a position he held for four years. Growing up in the political scene I learned when to smile, how to shake someone's hand, who the family liked, who we didn't like; even at a young age I saw through to how superficial politics could be. Certainly all the politicians cared about the well-being of the town and its residents, but there was an underlying feeling of animosity that I never liked. This turned me off to politics until very recently.
When I turned 18 and was allowed to vote in the local elections, I registered as a Republican, like my dad and voted for who the family liked. This is how I have voted for the past three years. I see the upcoming presidential election as a chance to think for myself and learn as much as I can about both candidates in order to make an informed and educated decision. I was given hope by what was clearly a facade of civility between the two parties. I had started to think that politics wasn't really all about name calling, uncovering dirt, and attacking the opponent after all. Apparently, I was wrong, and recently, I have become discouraged. Now accusations are flying and people are losing sight of really important issues that were at the heart of both campaigns early on. It is for this reason that I will never really enjoy politics and will continue to stuggle with choosing a candidate to support in this election.

good, old fashioned family values

At both the Republican and Democratic National Conventions, all candidates have devoted a lot of time to introducing their families. Family values is a political and social concept that is culture specific, and its meaning has arguablely changed over time. It is still used as a persuasive element during campaigns, but with different meaning for different people. This makes the concept easy to relate to. In the 1950s, the Cleavers were America's ideal family. Today, that concept is much harder to define. I find it ironic that all the canididates claim to have stong family values, but cannot define this vague term in today's world. They reference ideal families of the past, and praise their own families who represent the mix of what it means to be a family in America today: single parent upbringings, sons in the military, adopted children, pregnant teenagers. It is interesting that the term has such a conservative history, but today means different things for different families. I think this is just one example of how society has grown much faster than politics, and political ideologies have some catching up to do.