Politics Political Articles

In recent political campaigns, we’ve seen the net used quite effectively as a campaign tool. Politicians now know they can reach millions of people easily by using Internet marketing techniques that have worked so well for the business sector in selling their products and services to Americans. Now politicians are using those same techniques to sell their candidacy and their points of view on the issues of the day.

It started with email campaigns. Obtaining lists from various sources, savvy politicians send unsolicited emails to as many email users as they can, introducing themselves, their issues and positions, while also providing an option for the reader to join the politician’s mailing list. If you happened to join Al Gore’s mailing list when he was running against George W. Bush, you received email after email from him, written by him, as if you and he were old Harvard buds keeping in touch. While it didn’t help him win the election, it did initiate a new way of conducting political campaigns. Other politicians, such as President Obama, have followed Al Gore’s example with greater success. Email changed the way political campaigns are conducted, but more was yet to come.

In the recent national election, politicians discovered the power of Internet video, and specifically, YouTube. This site allows anyone to upload video and anyone who has net access to view them. It’s like getting on television without the hazard of having a reporter like Katie Couric asking you embarrassing questions, questions that don’t let you communicate your positions, that challenge your veracity (that’s for your opponent’s video to do), questions from the devil’s advocate, or the devil himself. With Internet video you stage the event yourself. There’s no pretense at being unbiased. That’s a mass media technique.

Take note of Michele Bachman and Alan Grayson. Last year they came out of obscurity and onto the world stage of YouTube to become ‘viral sensations’, as Time magazine called them in an article announcing YouTube’s entry into the toolkit of political campaigns. The two were at opposite ends of the health care issue that has since been resolved, but now anyone following politics knows them by sight, and also knows their social and political views. No longer dependent on traditional media to get their messages out, politicians can depend on YouTube to make them and their views available to millions of voters, who can watch and listen to them as often as they like. No reporter is leading you to a conclusion about the candidates and their views. You get to lead yourself.

You only need to consider how our current president was able to fund his campaign through Internet appeals for contributions to recognize the tremendous power the net now plays in political campaigns. This is a radical change to the ‘old’ way in which Americans have been presented political debate. Up to now, both politicians and voters have relied on the mass media to present the political issues and choices. Their decisions determined which political campaigns would receive attention, when and how often they would be heard, and, to a large extent, what we, the voters, would hear. This amounted to a few people defining reality for the rest of us, a sort of dictatorship of the media.

Their ownership of the means of communication was their power over us. Now, the net has wrested that power from them and placed it in our own hands! Shocking indeed. Now, we can choose for ourselves what, when, and how often we will hear and watch politicians express their views. Thanks to the net, we are freed from having to trust a few media ‘elites’ to shape our social and political reality. We only need to give both sides a fair hearing to get that balanced view mass media tells us they give us because they say they do. With the net in the hands of the people and freely available to all politicians, we are enabled to set our own destiny. The dictatorship of the mass media has been overthrown. The prospect of free and responsible political campaigns is born. Shine on, Internet, shine on.

The author has been writing articles online for 4 years now. Come visit his latest site CPA Instruments by Ritoban C that discusses CPA Instruments review.

“Tippecanoe and Tyler Too.”

“In your heart you know he’s right.”

“Yes, we can.”

Those are three of the most famous presidential campaign slogans in United States presidential campaign history. The first – Tippecanoe and Tyler Too – was from the 1840 campaign of William Henry Harrison (Tippecanoe) and his running mate, Martin Tyler. In many ways Harrison ran the first modern presidential campaign, and his catchy campaign slogan is evidence of that much. Sadly for Harrison, he couldn’t make good on many of his campaign promises as he died after just thirty days in office after contracting pneumonia at the inauguration.

The best example of competing presidential campaign slogans comes from the 1964 presidential campaign in which the incumbent, Lyndon Baines Johnson, was running against republican Barry Goldwater. Johnson, a tough talking Texan with a progressive streak, had been vice president under John F. Kennedy (who himself had no true campaign slogans in 1960) and took over as commander in chief when Kennedy was assassinated in 1963.

Johnson’s campaign slogans were many and varied at first for the 1964 election, but eventually he settled upon “The stakes are too high for you to stay at home.” It was one of the all time brilliant campaign slogans, mixing the right amount of alarmist “get out the vote” urgency, with a bit of slandering of the opposition, with just the right amount of pandering to the populace – as in, “we know if you vote, you’ll vote for us.”

Goldwater, the arch-conservative lunatic, went with “In your heart you know he’s right.” Goldwater’s campaign slogan was a plea toward the baser, tribal instincts in all of us. He ran on a platform of war against both the Soviet Union as well as war against the United States’ working class. This was the height of the cold war, and Goldwater wanted to get the people behind him and make the cold war hot – go toe-to-toe with the russians, mutually assured destruction be damned.

Fortunately for him, it turned out in the end that the people chose Johnson and nobody ended up giving the keys to the world’s largest nuclear arsenal to a madman.

The most recent notable of the presidential campaign slogans was Barack Obama’s “Yes, we can!” Unlike either Johnson or Goldwater, he appealed to the hope for a better world in all of us rather than the fear of a worse world. He used that slogan and several others – including “Change we can believe in” – to become the first african american to win the presidency.

The author has been writing articles online for nearly 4 years now. Come visit her latest website that discusses Holmes humidifier filters and warm mist humidifiers.

The Obama education speech scheduled for Tue, Sep 8th, 2009 is one that needs to be said and heard by our nation’s young and old alike. Education is one of the areas where the U.S. has lost significant leadership to many other countries worldwide. In fact, it’s embarrassing that the “richest” country in the world puts so little emphasis on education. As stated by researcher Gary Phillips of the American Institutes for Research (AIR) in 2007, “We’re kind of in the middle of the pack [with the rest of the world]. Being in the middle of the pack is really a mediocre place to be.”

The debate about the message of the Obama education speech is the wrong place to spend one’s energy. I find it hard to believe that any politician can be accused of “spreading their political agenda” through a topic on ensuring that our children stay in school and taking responsibility for their success.

Let’s evaluate the opposite approach taken by some people who oppose President Obama’s speech. They are recommending that parents keep their children home and not listen to the President’s speech. What kind of message does that send to our children, “that education is not important or that our nation’s leader is one not to be trusted?”

Learn more about this great article at http://www.davidkchan.com.

When most people think about political campaign strategies, they think about the dirty aspects. Political campaigns can be extremely cut-throat affairs as anyone familiar with American politics knows. What people don’t realize is that the mudslinging and ruthlessness is only one aspect. Political strategies involve a lot more than digging up dirt on your opponents.

Do you have any idea on how kids learn about and form opinions on American politics? During this Presidential election cycle, it was pointed out that the public opinion polls for adults matched closely with the many informal kid’s polls, conducted online and in classrooms across America. The obvious conclusion is that children are heavily influenced by what their parents have to say on which candidate is best.

This past presidential election was really something. Women in American politics was center stage for everyone to see. Hillary Clinton running for the Democratic Presidential nomination and Sarah Palin running for the Republican Vice President nomination. These were two different but driving individuals. In the end, both lost for their bids but the political scene has probably changed for ever. Expect to see more women in American politics running for the highest US office.

Glocal or more frequently Glocalization is a word now in more common usage that has, surprisingly, been around for almost 2 decades. According to Wikipedia it was coined a generation ago by Dr. Manfred Lange in Bonn, Germany in 1990 while preparing for the Global Change Exhibition. He was interested in the interaction between local, regional and global interactions hence coining the term GLOCAL.

North central Minnesota tourism will never be the same now that the primaries have already been held there. The movie star quality of both Hilary and Borok drew crowds from far and wide. Many people went from one side of the state to the other just for the chance to see both candidates. You also had “groupie�? candidate followers that would go from one event to the next in the state just to see their person one more time. Obama followers seemed to do that more than the ones for Hilary, but then again he seems to draw a younger crowd and they are generally more mobile and more willing to sleep on a couch somewhere than the older crowd following Hillary is. McCain did not seem to have that same draw. People seemed to come mostly from just the local area to hear his speeches, something that both the republicans and the democrats took note of. Huckabee did have his draw, mostly Christians from all over the state that felt rather left out in the whole process. His draw was young and old and all ages in between, while McCain seemed to draw mostly older voters. Time will tell as to the election results.

The candidates did not seem to spend as much time in Minnesota as other states. Of course living in Iowa I saw them almost nonstop for the past year. I would have thought that they could have increased Minnesota tourism travel by a significant amount if they had spent that much time up there. Minnesota is a large state without too many large population areas, but they to care about their politics and would have traveled some distances just to hear the candidates positions on the subjects they are interested in. When they drive those distances they don’t just turn around an go home either. They find a place to spend the night and they find a place to eat. They may even work a shopping trip in as long as they are in the big city. Talk about an economic stimulus package. With that many people spending that much money Minnesota could have turned their economy around without federal help. But the candidates aren’t interested in fixing problems, oh no they are only interested in talking about how they will fix things if they get elected. You have to give them your vote before they will do anything, they won’t do it out of the goodness of their hearts.

If the primaries were held as first in the nation here it would increase Wisconsin tourism. Unfortunately the parties fined other states for pulling such a stunt and it didn’t go well for them. They weren’t allowed to send any representatives, and I think that was a little harsh. Just because the parties broke the ruled doesn’t mean that the citizens shouldn’t have the opportunity to decide who they want for a candidate. I think that is just wrong and should be against the constitution someplace. Our government was founded on being of the people, by the people, and for the people. That principle is violated when they can’t send their representatives. What would happen to our democracy if that rule were allowed during the main election rather than the primary? There was a large turnout on the democratic side for the election that didn’t mean a thing. I don’t know if their vote would have changed things or not, but that isn’t the point, the point is that the people were not represented even if it was only a minor election. If I were king I would have found a better punishment for the offending state, something like no income for any of the political ads that were run.

If the primaries were held as first in the nation here it would increase Wisconsin tourism. Unfortunately the parties fined other states for pulling such a stunt and it didn’t go well for them. They weren’t allowed to send any representatives, and I think that was a little harsh. Just because the parties broke the ruled doesn’t mean that the citizens shouldn’t have the opportunity to decide who they want for a candidate. I think that is just wrong and should be against the constitution someplace. Our government was founded on being of the people, by the people, and for the people. That principle is violated when they can’t send their representatives. What would happen to our democracy if that rule were allowed during the main election rather than the primary? There was a large turnout on the democratic side for the election that didn’t mean a thing. I don’t know if their vote would have changed things or not, but that isn’t the point, the point is that the people were not represented even if it was only a minor election. If I were king I would have found a better punishment for the offending state, something like no income for any of the political ads that were run.

All of the candidates seem to be showing up at all the Missouri tourism events. I guess they think the more people that they get to see face to face the more votes they will get. I’m not that kind of a voter. I want to know what they believe in and what their agenda is. Take Hillary for example, she has made it apparent that she is going to push for health care for everyone, but she doesn’t state how she is going to pay for it. Is universal health care actually going to be cheaper than what we have now or is it going to cause our taxes to go sky high? I think the increases in taxes is likely, therefore she is out of my mix. Obama voted for partial birth abortion. Once I heard that he was off my radar, that is one issue I am becoming more and more resolute on. Edwards dropped out of the race so his opinions are irrelevant any more. Romney just doesn’t sit right with me, he just looks like the rich kid who always gets what he wants. He changes his views to fit the situation. Huckaby was really looking good but his support has dwindled and you can’t support a man that you know is going to loose. That leaves me with McCain.

Throughout Europe the public dislikes landfill so much that they are willing to pay a hefty premium on their rates bill for expensive (but green, and environmentally positive) recycling, and the European Union saw this campaign and has taken it further by issuing a Directive throughout all member states, including new accession states, that organic waste, that is all waste known as BMW (Biological Municipal Waste) being sent to landfill must be reduced substantially. After all, it is this waste which causes odours, and as it rots and decomposes in landfills, causes the greatest risk to the environment.

Now, on this subject there have been two completely opposite pieces of news with the last few days.

That is while in Ireland there are now serious concerns that their policy will be ineffective and in 2010 the Irish will fail to meet the target for landfill diversion, the opposite is true in Scotalnd where they find diversion and recycling easy.

But the problem is that in Ireland the amount they sent to landfill last year actual still continued to rise – despite all their recycling efforts.

In Scotland they announced that not content with their own success, they will now go better than the EU requirements, and aim for a zero waste (to landfill) policy.

But, across the Irish sea all is so different and the Irish politicans really do have to get their landfill and recycling policy sorted out. Financial restraints alone are not going to be enough to reduce landfilling. Charges for landfilling waste are already extremely high.

Failure to comply with the EU Directive would mean that Ireland would be charged a heavy fine by the EU Parliament.

On the other hand the Scots must surely be applauded for their environmental awareness and commitment to keep their beautiful country clean, and as landfill waste free as possible. For more about the politics of waste management visit the Wastersblog.

 

The West Central Iowa Tourism board loved having the first caucus in the nation. The campaigns bring some money into the state, but the thing they do best is bring free advertising to the state. With all the media coverage we get it is easy to showcase the state, most people don’t even understand that. The people watching the news coverage do not realize that they are actually having Iowa marketed to them. They sit and watch the TV blissfully unaware that they are getting subliminal pictures of the things we have to offer in this state.

The democrats seem to do a better job of being in the show places when they have their news conferences. It’s my opinion that they seem to enjoy a little tourism while they are on the trail, and who could blame them. Being on the road most all the time and doing the hard work of campaigning, who wouldn’t like even a short break seeing the sights. Our nation has lots to offer by points of interest and, remember, politicians are people too. If you had a chance to hold a rally in a parking lot or a beautiful historic building, which would you choose?

Political yard signs are one of the most noticeable attributes of a political campaign in the United States. These small signs are often placed in yards and other highly visible places. Lawn signs are considered a vital component of any local campaign. They are a cheap and effective method of making a candidate known in the election district.

Campaign signs play an instrumental role in establishing a candidate’s identity and acquainting the public with the names of citizens who are running for public office. Political yard signs generally contain the name of the candidate and the office they are running for, and if the candidate is an incumbent, the sign may say so. In some cases, party affiliation might be mentioned on the sign. Extras like the election date or campaign slogan are often added but tend to divert the viewer from the key message. Party symbols are quite popular with yard signs, but photos on a yard sign are controversial. An attractive photo can lead voters to identify with the candidate; on the other hand, signs with photos are usually more expensive. Election and Campaign Sign package prices will depend upon the color, size and quantity you order. 

www.CandidateSigns.com can help you design beautiful,effective yard signs cheap. Our political election campaign signs are for republican and democrat candidates elections and elections for state, county, city elections including mayor, commissioner, congress, city, county sheriff, local candidate elections senate house of representatives. Our political campaign signs stand up to the wind rain and all of the elements, even the sun. We have all types and sizes including billboard size, corrugated plastic sign printing, election yard signs and political election campaign banners, handouts & lawn signs.  Please observe all ordinances, laws, local codes, and zoning regulations concerning the placement and display of political election advertising signs & banners.

If you’re looking for election campaign signs, at the lowest possible price, visit Candidate Signs.com – the #1 Campaign Signs Website on the Internet.

Anaerobic Digestion is a cinderella among waste treatment technologies, and yet it provides a unique method by which the fuel methane is produced. Methane is natural gas. It is hardly necessary to point out that natural gas is an incredibly useful green fuel with the advantages that it can be:-

• made from waste, waste slurries etc (energy that is freely available and would othewise be wasted);
• burnt easily to create electricity plus heat which can be used for example to heat a greenhouse;
• converted to hydrogen which is a clean fuel and can be used in an hydrogen fuel cell;
• is a fuel unaffected by oil price and thus provides price stability;
• converted to a biofuel for cars such as bioethanol.

However, the technology needs further development before it can show its full potential.  Governments can and should assist do so visit this Anaerobic Digestion site here to learn more and help to get this technology into the mainstream.

Whether its the struggle for freedom or thoughts on the current political front, African American Art continues to portray current and past beliefs in the African American community. In the 60’s, artists used images of black power, Malcolm X and racism’s effect on America as powerful subject matter to convey their political beliefs. Todays artist also promote their art by telling of modern day struggles and the stating their political beliefs through their artistic expression.

The audio book ‘The Case Against Hillary Clinton’ shows an other side of the ex-First Lady who is a candidate for US President.

Publishers Weekly said about the book: “Noonan offers a searing analysis of what she sees as the emptiness of HRC’s political platform and the mountain of questions about her past that remain unanswered.”

Certainly worthwhile listening to, if you want to make yourself an image of who HRC really is. There are more audio books about Hillary Clinton, some pro, some contra. I’m currently listening to them all to be able to get a clearer image of who I should vote for….

Just discovered this listing for audio book authors – Guess what?

Geroge bush is listed as an audio books author! In the list of audiobook authors whose name starts with the letter B he shows up where he belongs: Bottom of the list …

The audiobook that is attributed to him is ‘All The Best, George Bush’ – sort of an auto biography.

As there are more candidates every day announcing their candidacy for President, it’s more important than ever to make sure you know who you elect. Listening to the audio book ‘ Arkansas Mischief: The Birth of a National Scandal‘ might be a good way to refresh the memory.

I just finished this one…. makes you think if Hillary is really the best choice?? Now I’m listening to ‘People’s History of the United States‘. This audio book goes back a bit further, and it seems it will lead me right to the ‘War on Terrorism’ of these days. Compelling stuff, and the parallels to todays events is amazing! Definintely recommended listening!