Bloggers and the First Amendment

It has been a year since a federal appeals court ruled that bloggers have the same  First Amendment protections as journalists when it comes to the issue of defamation.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2014/01/20/defamation-bloggers-supreme-court/4658295/

Do you believe that bloggers should be afforded those same protections?

Why Polls Don’t Matter At This Point

The polls listed below should demonstrate to everyone why surveys regarding Presidential hopefuls mean little at this point.  For example, even though then-VP George Bush won his party’s nomination in 1988, Senator Howard Baker who was third in a 1987 poll never ended up running for President.  In 1999, Elizabeth Dole and former VP Dan Quayle dropped out of the running before the January 2000 Iowa Caucus.  The country never had a President Rudy Giuliani or a Republican nominee by the name of Giuliani.  Sarah Palin did not run in 2012.  Neither did Chris Christie nor Mitch Daniels nor George Pataki for that matter.  So why take a poll at this time?  Do they matter?  Do you see any of these candidates emerging as the front runner for the GOP nomination?

The Senate and The Super Bowl

Being a political scientist and a sports fan, I thought it would be interesting to see if there were any political trends as to predicting a winner in the Super Bowl.  For the purposes of this post, I thought I would look at the years when the United States Senate has changed hands (i.e. shift in party majority) and did that correlate to a winner in the following Super Bowl.  Here’s what I found:

1980:  Republicans win Senate; 1981:  Oakland (AFC) defeats Philadelphia (NFC)

1986:  Democrats win Senate; 1987:  New York Giants (NFC) defeats Denver (AFC)

1994:  Republicans win Senate; 1995:  San Francisco (NFC) defeats San Diego (AFC)

2006:  Democrats win Senate; 2007:  Indianapolis (AFC) defeats Chicago (NFC)

2014:  Republicans win Senate; 2015:  ?

I hoped to find a clear correlation between the party winning the Senate and the conference winning the Super Bowl.  That I did not find.  However, what I do see is that when the Republicans win back the Senate, the team from the West wins the Super Bowl, while the team from east of Mississippi wins the big game when the Democrats win back the Senate in the previous year.  So, in all fun and games, let’s just say that Seattle will win the Super Bowl.

First Amendment Freedoms

Federalism and Ideology

What is federalism?  There are several definitions for it, but I like to think that federalism is the sharing and distribution of power and resources between the federal government and the states.  You can also add “…and the local governments” when you discuss the separation of powers between the levels of government.  For the purposes of this discussion, let’s examine two different views.  The first view, the decentralist view contends that the Constitution is a compact among the sovereign states which gave the central government a limited framework to work from.  Those who oppose such a framework would be centralists.  Centralists see the Constitution as the supreme law of the land and that the states are not the representative of the people.  Centralists claim that the representative of the people is the national government.

Where do you stand on the idea of federalism?  Today’s centralists are more of the socialist and liberal variety while the decentralists are more conservative or libertarian in their thinking.

This Week’s Memorabilia — John Anderson

This is a button from the John Anderson for President campaign in 1980.  Anderson was a Republican congressman from Illinois who lost to Ronald Reagan in the Republican primaries that year.  He decided to run as an Independent or in some states a National Unity, candidate.  Anderson polled very well in the Summer and early Fall of 1980, but as the campaign inched closer to November, Anderson faltered.  His campaign finished third behind Reagan and President Jimmy Carter.  Why is it difficult for Independent candidates to win the Presidency?  (None have.)

Do You Follow Politics?

Party Conflicts

The following is an excerpt from an edition of a Pearson Custom Textbook that I wrote in the past:

I am a big fan of political movements. I like how they bring new voters to the political process. For me, the more participation in politics, the better for our democracy. What I do fear, however, is the power of this anti-incumbent, anti-establishment movement that is currently in our midst and how long it will last.

History shows us that political movements that challenge the political status quo tend to start off quickly and then fade away just as fast.   The Liberty and Free Soil Parties of the 1830s and 1840s wanted to abolish slavery to different degrees, but because these parties were considered one-issue parties which could not challenge the breadth and depth of the major parties of the time, the Democrats and Whigs. In fact, those anti-slavery movements gave rise to the Republican Party in the 1850s.

The Populist Party of the 1880s established itself as a party working on behalf of America’s farmers and laborers. The Democratic Party, seeing a rift within their own party, usurped the rising third party’s issues, which in turn, nullified the need of a third party.  By 1900, the Populist Party as a national force was no more.

Progressives found a voice in 1912 with the candidacy of Teddy Roosevelt for President as the Bull Moose nominee. The Progressive movement had been around before 1912, but now they had a national figure to head their cause. When Roosevelt lost that year, the Bull Moose Party dissolved and the Progressive movement sputtered.

In 1992, I remember the anti-establishment candidacy of Ross Perot. He had ballot access in all 50 states. He rode a national tide built on small government, lower tax, and government accountability rhetoric. Perot lost, but Republicans used that same rhetoric to win both houses of Congress in 1994. When Perot ran for President in 1996, his campaign was considered unnecessary because the Republican Party was now firmly entrenched as the party of smaller government.

But what of that smaller government, low tax, government accountability, Republican Party of 1994? By 2008, the party had shifted away from those principles and gave rise to the Tea Party and anti-incumbent movements that we see today.  It is now 2015 and the Republican Party still has a conflict with its membership as so-called Tea Party Republicans have labeled House Speaker John Boehner as an establishment Republican.

My question is: are anti-establishment party movements good for American politics?

This Week’s Memorabilia

This piece of Presidential memorabilia was from the 1964 campaign of Republican nominee, Barry Goldwater.  Goldwater lost the election to President Lyndon Johnson in a landslide.  However, Goldwater’s candidacy shifted the Republican Party to the conservative right.   Your thoughts on the slogan/bumper sticker?

More Things Change…

In this clip from the January 11, 2015 edition of “Meet the Press”, a discussion is being held regarding the 2016 Presidential election.

Clinton and Bush and Romney

Why do Americans seem to gravitate to more familiar names for President rather than new up-and-coming individuals?