Electoral Process Topics
1. Harold Holmes Pitner. Yes, Donald Trump. The Electoral System Is Rigged Against Black Americans. The Guardian.
The main idea of Pitners article is so-called the rigged elections that were the main argument in recent Trumps speeches. The idea is that the electoral system is rigged against him, and, thus, the results of the elections will be rigged, too. In such a way, Trump tries to influence the voters, realizing that his poll rates continue to fall every day. However, these considerations have the basis. According to Pitner, they refer to the electronic scandal of Democratic National Committee (DNC), which showed that some party members seek to undermine Sanders, as evidence (Pitner). Nevertheless, the most provocative thesis is Trumps remarks about the removal of discriminatory voting practices. He believes that it will lead to fraud. He adds that the voting rights of African Americans and other minorities will result in the rigged system. Moreover, it may cause the loss of democratic values. Pitner notes that this position is hypocritical in this sense. The Republican leaders do not comment such allegations. Besides, the author notes that Trumps rhetoric is becoming more dangerous and worrisome because he loses its rating. It is important that the Republican Party cannot control Trump who can say anything.
In the current article, the author tries to understand the rhetoric of Trumps campaign, using his thesis about the legitimacy of votes. This time, Pitner attempts to explain the logic behind the words about the rigged elections but concludes that it is more a provocation than a serious statement. In addition, the Republicans cannot control Trump anymore. On the other hand, maybe they do not want to control Trump because, generally, he is a scapegoat with whose help the Republicans can easily raise the rating. It would be more interesting if the author discussed this idea in detail. Besides, there are only few theses about the racial aspect of the elections. It is unclear why the civil rights of African-Americans are limited in certain states. However, the racial issues in Trumps campaign are significant in many aspects, but many Americans do not consider this fact. It is a bad symptom of the modern democratic processes.
2. Michael McFaul. Why Putin Wants a Trump Victory (So Much He Might Even Be Trying to Help Him). The Washington Post.
The current article is about why Putin wants Trump to win the election. The author tells what steps the Russian president and the Kremlin do in order to influence the outcome of the elections. The resonant speech on the Crimea absolutely coincides with Putins rhetoric. Thus, many provocative ideas of the Republicans can be a part of Russian policy. In addition, Trump did not fully understand the geopolitics of the United States, including that connected with NATO. The author says, Trump has also disparaged our allies in Asia, creating new opportunities for Russian influence (McFaul). All his actions is a good incentive for Putin to take other intervention steps. For example, he could sever the trade relations with different countries. McFaul insists that the most useful for Putin is that Trump tries to deprive the US of the leadership in the world politics. The Republican party does not care about human rights and democracy. It can lead to divisive policy inside the country that finally will be a perfect situation for Putins actions.
I think that is an interesting but very controversial article. The author tries to combine Trumps provocative rhetoric with ??Putins totalitarian policies, showing how the Republicans victory will change the US domestic and foreign policies. An important aspect of the article is also the comparison of Clinton and Putin, who differ significantly. The main issue is the question of the Crimea that acts as a marker in the candidates political programs. Nevertheless, the Kremlin openly supports Trump what is a disturbing signal when democracy is regarded. It is beneficial to read more about Clintons connections with other world leaders, such as French and German politicians, in order to see a complete picture of the world geopolitics in the context of the American elections.
3. Lynn Vavreck. How Much Is Donald Trump Hurting the G.O.P.? Heres a Way to See. The New York Times.
Vavreck analyzes the election statistics that show how the Democrats win during the last months. She notes that tables used in the analysis are based on the important principles, namely the ranking of a candidate and the economic indicator. However, she adds one more significant criterion to the rating, specifically the anonymous surveys where the respondents vote for the parties regardless of specific candidates (Vavreck). It is important that the author tries to explain how the Republicans decided to nominate Trump as their candidate instead of Ted Cruz or John Kasich, who were the nominees in the winter and spring of 2016. It was hard for the voters to switch from the previous candidates to a new contender. Thus, data on this question give a different perspective on the tax Trump is levying on the G.O.P. In fact, the nomination of Trump influenced the Republicans that lost their positions sharply in the late July. In conclusion, the rating of Trump does not reflect the general thoughts about the Republicans since it is only the negative rating of one person.
The article is quite interesting because it shows how Trump affected the ranking of the Republicans. The negative replicas about race and ethnicity reduced the number of voters supporting the party. In other words, the current statistics clearly prove that the official announcement of Trump was damaging for the Republicans. I think that these tables are the most important part of the article even though, in fact, they are only a method of demonstrating the contradiction between Trump and a general attitude towards the Republicans.
4. Lauren Carroll.Fact-Checking the Clinton Foundation Controversy. PolitiFact.
In this article, the author tries to reveal how the financial organization of Clintons is connected with corruption. Many critics insist that Mr. Clinton tried to hide money through his company, and the whole political campaign of his wife can be anti-legitimate. Carroll proposes arguments for and against the foundation. On the one hand, it was created as a memorandum of understanding with the administration of President Barack Obama in December 2008 to report their donors (Carroll). Accordingly, the foundation promised to report their donors to avoid conflicts of interest, particularly among the Democrats. Moreover, Hillary Clinton signed an ethical agreement with the State Department. However, the correspondence shows that the communication between Mrs. Clinton and the department was questionable and contained many hidden things. On the other hand, many do not understand how the Clinton Foundation works. The author asserts that Typically, a private foundations primary activity is grantmaking, giving money to charities who actually do the work (Carroll). Accordingly, the Clintons did not receive any compensation or profit from their work according to tax documents. Despite this fact, many people think the opposite.
This article shows how the foundation of Clintons has both positive and negative reactions. Perhaps, it is the result of the current elections, and many critics want to reduce the candidates rating. At the same time, some arguments in the article are valuable, especially that of the unknown facts about the correspondence. It is possible that Mrs. Clinton does have hidden accounts because it is not a fact that charities try to conceal indirect profits. On the other hand, the article provides no specific arguments regarding the matter. Carroll summarizes only general information and theories. The question definitely requires further exploration. Nonetheless, the article pushes to think about the legitimacy of Hillary Clintons gains that were also used for her presidential campaign.
5. Robert Altman. Trump Will Lose. Can the Republicans Recover? The Financial Times.
The author believes that Trump has no chance to win the forthcoming elections. He loses his votes every day, including those of the Afro-Americans and women, towards who he is often abusive in his public speeches. However, Altman suggests that everything might happen even though Trumps campaign is weak and not convincing so far. According to the author, much depends on how the new team of Clinton will cope with the following tasks: First, will the new Clinton administration be able to pass its economic programme? And, second, can the national Republican Party recover from a devastating loss in November? (Altman). One more challenge is how the Democrats will back their control in the White House after the victory. It means that Clinton will not have the advantage that her husband and Obama previously had. She is to increase a tax according to the economic reform. However, it is questionable whether the Republicans will vote for this proposition. If not, the plan will probably fail. The Republicans will try to regain the advantage by any means, and the economic plan will be a good opportunity for this. However, the author argues that Paul Ryan will be forced to cooperate with new leaders on immigration matters to strengthen and build his credibility for future presidential elections.
It is a thought-provoking article in which the author tries to foresee the consequences of elections. Altman suggests that the Democrats will win and discusses the future actions of both the Democrats and the Republicans after the elections. The authors idea is quite logical and consistent because it is based on many years of personal experience in Bill Clintons team. However, the main focus is the economic plan, which many consider as Hillary Clintons trump card. At the same time, there are many potential obstacles, particularly in the context of radical reforms. In addition, it provides a possible plan of rehabilitation for the Republicans after the election.