Checkpoint 5:

Monday, November 8th, 2017

Checkpoint 5: Elections

Welcome to deconstructing politics in America!

I believe elections can and cannot influence an individual's decision. If an individual typically does not label themselves as either Democrat or Republican, elections can influence them. It is all up to the individual's personal priorities for the country, and what these politicians plan to do. This has been seen in the presidential election of 2016. For example, many family friends I know, do label themselves as Democrats, however, a large priority for them within America was combatting out of the country terrorist attack, which is what Donald Trump largely advertised in fixing if he was elected president. For individuals whose priorities with always align with the priorities of either Democrats or Republicans, elections are not a large influencer for them, because they are so sure of their party's priorities for the country.

For my final blog post, I have decided to compare the two Democratic candidates, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. I chose both of my artifacts to be "in favor" videos of each of these candidates.

The video in favor of Hillary Clinton is -  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrX3Ql31URA

From the first watch, it is clear to see that Hillary plays on her candidate's weaknesses instead of her positives. The majority of the video is very unprofessional comments made by Donald Trump about certain minorities, women and disabled. This brings a large strength to Hillary's campaign I believe, especially how this is focused on children of all colors watching him say these words on the television. Every single voter becomes sensitive when children are involved in an election. She is purposely making them involved to create emotional negative feelings towards the audience. Many start to question; what example am I setting for my children if I vote for him? I believe this campaign technique is very smart and effective and made at least some voters think twice about everything they represent when they vote for Donald Trump. This campaign was as well essential in the final days of the election between Hilliary Clinton and Donald Trump.

The video in favor of Bernie Sanders is - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Syln8IkOIqc

This video is more mainly focused on what Bernie Sanders will do, instead of the negativity against the opposing opponent. In my opinion, I believe this is a more professional way to approach the audience. The entire video is focused on racial discrimination and police brutality. It shows an African American family, whose grandfather was murdered on the streets. The video specifically shows how he "could not breathe" as police wrapped around there neck around him. It then goes to focus on family, which brings in an emotional value to the public as well. It then moves on to different segments of Bernie Sanders going up against the criminal justice system within his rallies. I believe this campaign ad is extremely effective mainly for minorities of color because they feel that they have a potential president who will do something about the race issue in America. This timing was perfect within the couple weeks of the Democratic potential president, also as more videos have surfaced the internet of police brutality.

Thank you.

Checkpoint 4: Media

Monday, November 6th, 2017

Checkpoint 4: Media

Welcome to deconstructing politics in America!

The current event I decided to choose was terrorism. I chose this topic because there recently has been a lot of acts of terrorism that I would like to learn more about. Also, liberals and conversations have very strong opposite opinions on this issue. This lead to why I chose one news site that is liberal based and one site that is conservative based.  

My first news source is CNN, a liberal new site. This article compares different types of current violent acts in America. Specifically, it compares the Texas shooting and the New York attack. This source claim that race is a large factor in how the public and government decides what is a terrorist attack and what is not. This article was influenced by the controversial race issue in America. Recently on the liberal side, there has been a lot of focus on the race issue, and this article addresses it even farther. I believe this is credible because it does examples as evidence and reasoning towards why race factors into the unfairness of the definition of terrorism. They give specific definitions towards what terrorism actually means, and how it should apply to all kinds of violence. This source is very much bias because it is liberal. The article leaves outgoing in depth with the conservative side of this argument and specifically saying that this is because of race. This article uses symbolism, as this issue of unfairly labeling some issues as terrorism and some not, as a symbol for how the root of this issue is race. I find this argument very convincing. It compares different acts of violence with another, talks of the motivation for this, and how many people were affected. After this, it talks about how both of these violent acts follow the same motivations and a close number of how many people were effective. This shows how both acts of violence specifically fit the definition of terrorism. Then it questions why only one act (performed by a man of color), was labeled as terrorism, but not the white man. This shows a huge double standard. As well their argument is even more convincing because it talks of how for something to be an act of terrorism, it does not need to be from another country, as many think.

My second news source is Fox News, a conservative new site. This gives a summary of the NYC terrorist attack. He talks about how he was in relation to Isis and chose Halloween because he knew more people would be on the street. This new site talks of the pedestrians killed during this attack. This source is influenced by the main focus on Donald Trump's campaign; terrorism. He focuses on how important this issue is combat, so it makes sense that the Republican party is covering this issue.  I think this article is relevant and credible because it deals with a current terrorist attack. They do provide evidence from the conclusion of the attack. The point of the view is obviously to report about the issue, but also make clear how he is largely connected to Isis. He used the rhetorical device of pathos, to have the audience feel a sense of emotional connection to the families of the pedestrians who died. I do find it convincing about the negative with this attack, because of how the terrorist was so proud of what he did and that he was connected with Isis. It definitely raises concern.

I believe the media can highly influence a voters choice on whether to vote Democrat or Republican. The media covers issues that they believe is a big concern to the public, especially when it affects them. For example, the Democrat media covered many issues about social injustice and specifically made them seem a huge concern to the public. They gave examples of specific rights that possibly could be taken away if Donald Trump was president. For the Republican media, they focused a lot on terrorist attacks, in attempt show the public that voting for Donald Trump, will help reduce the possibility of more attacks. The media focuses on issues that specifically will affect the public and makes them very apparent, to persuade the voters.

I look forward to expressing my ideas on this platform!

Checkpoint 3: Study a Politician

Wednesday, October 30th, 2017

Checkpoint 2: Study a Politician

Welcome to deconstructing politics in America!

For this next step, I chose to educate myself on the Green Party. The Green Party seemed very interesting to me because I feel that this party is never discussed, and I want to learn more about a smaller political party. On their website, they talk about this parties priorities within change for the government. Their priorities are along the lines of social justice, environmental change, and non-violent responses.

The artifact I chose to discuss in relation to this party was part of there website discussing the issue of the legalization of marijuana. This page starts with an immediate opinion about being in favor of legalizing marijuana. Once there opinion is stated, bullet points are shown beneath addressing more specific details as to why and how the legalization of marijuana will occur. These bullet points talk of using counseling and education to stop "the war on drugs" and when legalized felons convicted of marijuana use will be released. However, this website does not give any opinionated explanation as to why marijuana should be legalized. It is clear that the Green Party is very much in favor of decriminalizing the use and sales of marijuana.

http://www.gp.org/legalize_marijuana

The Politician I chose to educate myself on was Donald Trump. I chose Trump because he is the president and I believe it would be beneficial to hear his opinions from himself, rather than a bias new site. Donald Trump got elected in November 2016. His political party is the Republican party with the basic values of lower taxes, less government involvement in social issues and in favor of tradition.

The artifact I chose was a video on the Donald Trump website about repeal and replace Obamacare. There is a 40-second video with facts as to how Obama care has "failed the American people." The arguments are that it has raised costs, fewer choices for healthcare, fewer covered by Obama care and less freedom. Each second where it focuses on each specific issue talks of what this means more specifically with facts to back up the claim. It is clear that Trump and his administration is not in favor of Obamacare, but does not give any possible ways he plans to fix this in the video.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/repeal-and-replace-obamacare

The artifact from the Green Party and the artifact from the Donald Trump website had opposite strengths and weakness. While the Green Party focuses on HOW they will make a specific change towards the legalization of marijuana, they do not state why marijuana should become legalized. Without any context about why many believe marijuana should be legalized, it is hard for the reader to agree or disagree. Trump's website shows the complete opposite. They give opinions, with facts to back it up, but do not talk about how the government will now address the issue. Including a claim with evidence and explanation of how this issue will be addressed, is the key to persuading an audience. Without all these key components met, readers will have unanswered questions and cannot make a personal choice.

Political parties and politics both affect the readers and how they choose to vote. Voters feel that they have to either fit in the box of Democrat or Republican, therefore voters feel a pressure to align their individual views with these parties. Pointing out the negatives of the opposite party is a way that makes political parties or political gain votes. This is because usually, voters are more concerned with possible negative outcomes of electing representatives of the United States that could possibly cause harm to the country.

I look forward to expressing my ideas on this platform!

Checkpoint 2: Interest Groups

Wednesday, October 25th, 2017

Checkpoint 2: Interest Groups

Welcome to Deconstructing Politics in America!

The interest group I chose was the topic of abortion. I chose this interest group because this is a very controversial subject, that I believe is commonly misunderstood. As well, I have a very strong opinion on this subject.

The Republican opinion of this argument comes from a site titled, "National Right to Life". This site's main focus is on persuading the audience to see the issue of abortion as life or death. They have different clickable links as to how one can help, the facts, take action and much more. A tab is even included for a hotline for pregnant women who seek abortions. Republican's are typically known as "pro-life". This belief is defined by the belief that "every life should be valued" and that abortions are a form of murder.

http://www.nrlc.org/

The Democratic opinion on this argument is access to reproductive freedom for all. "NARAL Pro-Choice America", talks of the current stance on reproductive freedom, policies that impact one another and statistics about Americans pro-choice stance on abortion.

https://www.prochoiceamerica.org/

Democratic's and Republicans have a very opposite way of approach for the issues of abortion. Democrat's are focused on the idea that abortion is no one's business but the women herself. While Republicans are focused on the idea that any type of abortion is murder and must be stopped. Both sides are both very politically involved in protest.

Interest groups in general are a huge part of whom a voter chooses to vote for. These groups help bring new or more explained arguments into play through the media, protests and many more ways. If an argument one interest group heavily influences a voter, it could completely cast there vote from Republican to Democrat or visa versa. This is especially common when interest groups endorse a certain candidate, giving the voter a direct arrow to who to vote for.

Personally, I believe that the issue of abortion is no one's business but a women's own. If she does not feel comfortable with getting an abortion then she can have the baby or give it up for adoption. If this women is not ready to pursue a pregnancy for whatever reason, it is up to her to abort the baby. Making abortion illgeal does not in fact stop the amount of abortions that take place yearly, as many would assume. These women will still find a way (an extremely and potentially deathly way), to abort.  I as well disagree with "trap laws", as they give the opposite affect than what they attempt to give. Common "trap laws" are present in more conservative states. These "laws" focus on ways to "hold off" on a women's choice to abort. Such as therapy meetings, suicide pleads, pictures of growth and many more. These laws have been shown to not change the mind of the women who plans to abort, but instead carry out so this cell is now a growing baby, which no human wants to abort. The biggest issue of all is more access and education to contraceptive's so that unwanted pregnancies do not occur. Therefor, defunding planned parenthood does not make sense, because this organization provides education and contraceptives to many.

I look forward to expressing my ideas on this platform!

Checkpoint 1: Introductory

Welcome to Deconstructing Politics in America!

My name is Rachel Treckeme, and I am a 17-year-old senior living just outside of San Fransico. I attend Summit Shasta highschool. My school has given a chance for every senior to create there own blog and speak of there political beliefs.

I grew up with a Democratic mother and a Republican father. After a split between my parents, my dad moved farther and left me spending more time with my Democratic mother. As well, my relatives and all family friends growing up were Democrats. Simply to say, I have been influenced since a young age with Democratic morals.

Growing up with solid morals and not previously labeling myself either Democratic or Republican, a political ideology test gave me a label. Leading up to this test I started to become more active in politics and attending San Fransico marches along the lines of equal human rights. This test asked a series of questions that either was leaning towards Democratic or Republican -

and nothing in between. My final result was not surprising, Solid Liberal. The website emphasized the views optimistic about future and change, good diplomacy rather than strength and social safety net.

I look forward to expressing my ideas on this platform!