Widener Students on Politics

by

Just Go Away Romney

by Frank Heleniak

Widener University American Government Student

Before the election Mitt Romney was “the man,” “America’s comeback team,” and the next president. The GOP suddenly and blindly stood behind their candidate as the answer to the Obama question. Well now they just want him to go away. Post-Election sounds like the primaries all over again. Republican strategists will liken Romney to that of McCain who never established a strong foothold in the party and not seen by Republicans as one of their own. So why did those who did vote Romney ever vote for him in the first place?

Maybe 2012 wasn’t much unlike 2008. Another lame duck candidate? Or that the GOP is at fault and is too extreme and needs to change? Honestly, I think the real issue might be the general Republicans. It’s fair to say the Rs threw away the election in 2008. So 2012 could have been different, instead we allowed the candidates to destroy each other giving fuel for the Democrats. I’m sure some of the moderates like myself even hated the idea of voting for Romney then come election time offered our full support. That’s why it’ll be so easy to forget this election and Romney. Does the GOP need to rethink strategy and campaigning? Sure. But without regular Republicans demanding more from the party itself, the presidency is going to stay blue.

by

Who Needs an Election?

By Ryan Devine

Widener University American Government Student

A fundamental principle in American culture has always been our ability and responsibility to vote in elections, especially the Presidential election.  For just as long, “experts” have attempted to predict the winner’s ahead of time through mock polls, demographic studies, political trends and other methods of taking the pulse of the nation.  However, it appears that all of the professional polling companies might need to look elsewhere.  There have been a few surprising elements that have an uncanny ability to predict the outcome of elections.

The first indicator that should be looked at is the sale of presidential 7-11 cups.  Since 2000, the candidate whose cup created a higher profit for the convenience chain has also gone on to occupy the White House.  While admittedly a short sample, going 3 for 3 in all of the elections the gimmick has been around is still impressive.

For a trend with a little bigger sample size, we can look at the most iconic team in sports today, the New York Yankees. Of the last 15 elections, the Bronx Bombers have made the playoffs 9 times.  With the exception of 1996, every year that the Yankees have won the World Series, the Republican candidate has won the election and every time the Yankees make the playoffs but loose, the Democrats have won.

While the Yankees have one incorrect year over the 9 elections that their trend has been eligible, Halloween masks have an uncanny ability to be right.  Since 1980 the candidate who has had the most replicas of his face sold as a costume for Halloween has won every election (which means Obama can stop working now and take a few days off according to several reports.)

The most popular and accurate best indicator is none other than the District of Columbia’s own Washington Redskins.  The franchise that has had exactly two winning years in the last 12 years, and on pace for another regardless of RGIII’s heroics, is still the best in the world at predicting elections.  Since 1937 there have been 18 elections.  Anytime the Redskins win their last home game before the election, the incumbent has won the election 17 times.  The lone exception was the 2004 election when the Redskins lost but President Bush retained the office.  While some argue that since Bush didn’t win the popular vote in 2000 the rule could be tweaked so that the party that previously won the popular vote and not the Electoral College was the one actually being predicted by the Redskins which would make them a perfect 18 for 18 it is kind of irrelevant since 17 for 18 is still a 94 percent accuracy rate.

With President Obama selling more masks and the Yankees bowing out to the Detroit Tigers in the ALCS, it appears Mitt Romney and his fellow Republicans will all be sporting brand new Cam Newton jerseys come Sunday when the Redskins host the Carolina Panthers in a game that Vegas currently has the Redskins as a 3 and a half point favorite.

Postscript: The Redskins lost their final home game before the election to the Panthers yesterday.

by

Youngsters Not So Fired Up

By Amanda Raimer

Widener University American Government Student

In the New York Times article, “Idealism Harder to Find From Younger Voters”, it talks about reasons why the younger generation does not seem as excited about this election as the last. What the article found is that this demographic is focusing more on the details and facts behind each candidate rather than just their feel-good message as they promise prosperity and success in the future. At the same time, others are having a hard time connecting to either candidate and either find a trivial reason to back one of the candidates or choose not to vote at all. More or less what I got from this article is that young voters are having a hard time finding a reason to stand behind one candidate or the other, and this is leading to confusion.

As I was filling out my absentee ballot I had the same kind of feeling; I thought I knew who I was going to vote for but I was surprised to find that I was doubting myself because I didn’t really feel passionate about either candidate like I thought I would. I started to wonder why I and other young Americans like myself were running into this uncertainty, especially so close to the election. I think what has happened is this election is less focused on social issues, which most young people know a lot about, and more on financial and policy issues. These issues are important but they’re very hard to understand for a generation whom a majority of them are just starting to become independent and fiscally responsible. Trying to wade through all the jargon and facts and background to understand exactly what the candidates are supporting in their campaign is quite a task, one that many younger people don’t feel the need to do or give up on. Also, at this time in their lives, young people are still developing their ideals and values and trying to pick a candidate based on their principles when you are not sure of your own is difficult. So while I think that it is important to vote and be heard, I can understand how this confusion and uncertainty could lead a person to not vote at all.

by

Romney’s Loss?

by Bridget Hicks

Widener University American Government Student

Election day is tomorrow and voters seem to be siding with President Obama, at least on the east coast. In the aftermath of Sandy’s tragic visit, Obama seems to be the only feasible candidate for to help the country. After the hurricane, the east coast, especially in my home state of New Jersey, was devastated. How is it possible for Governor Christy to spearhead the state’s recovery alone?

Obama paid a visit to the places destroyed by Hurricane Sandy to present his support for the recovery of the towns and people who were distraught by this storm. He came to lend a helping hand to Governor Christy. Where was the other candidate? Where was Governor Romney?

Romney is staying strong with his word. Romney supports more state power, with smaller federal government power. He believes the states should be in charge of disaster recovery. As an in-land resident of New Jersey I was fortunate not to experience the complete and utter destruction in the coastal areas. However, my home, as well as others around me, also experienced destruction. Seeing President Obama going around to New Jersey citizens and offering his support was comforting. Obama is someone I would want to see leading the country. He is a man who is here to help in times of need and does not just assume his role to give states powers that he should also take responsibility for. With the election so close, this trip to New Jersey for Obama was a huge help not only to gain support from the people of the east coast but everywhere. When people hear of this, they think “what would I expect if I were in that situation?” They would want a president who is there for them and ready to come help. Romney seriously damaged his campaign by not coming over to the east coast and acknowledging this disaster while Obama capitalized on this opportunity.

by

Where is Obama’s Charisma?

By Ryan Devine

Widener University American Government Student

Jim Rutenberg recently penned an article depicting President Obama’s current campaign headquarters, strategy and enthusiasm.  Rutenberg’s article paints a picture of a very methodical, down to earth campaign committee that is working feverishly and with a slight air of desperation due to the recent surge by Governor Romney.  This stands in stark contrast to his 2008 campaign that became as much a pop-culture movement as it did a political one.  The boardwalks up and down the coast were littered with “Yes We Can” t-shirts and the iconic “Change” posters of Obama infiltrated every walk of life.  These gimmicks that then Senator Obama employed fueled him to a convincing win that never really seemed all that close in the waning weeks of the 2008 election.  However, this time around the possibility of defeat appears to be very real.  President Obama lived and died with the charismatic showman persona throughout his first run at presidency and, due to his natural talents, beat Senator John McCain.

President Obama seems to have abandoned that approach for the most part though and I have to believe it is a major factor in his inability to put Romney away before the debates and played a key role in his embarrassing performance in the first debate.  Essentially, he is playing a game that suits Mitt Romney’s strengths.  This year’s election seems to be a more classical campaign from both sides without the fanfare that Obama drew in ’08.  This has been a he advantage for Mitt Romney who comedian and political talking head John Stewart described as what you would get if you asked for a president to be shipped to you in a box, in terms of his appearance and his actions, while speaking with Bill O’Reilly on “The O’Reilly factor” in 2011.  Barack Obama’s inability to make himself the biggest celebrity in the world for a second time has clearly held back his ability to take control of this election.  Unless he can turn back the clock and really energize the nation around his image in the next two weeks, he is going have a very difficult time beating out Mitt Romney.

by

The Impact of Images in 2012 Presidential Advertising

by Amanda Raimer

Widener University American Government Student

A New York Times article, “Images, Themes and Props in Presidential Campaign Ads”, listed statistics about the kinds of subjects that were contained in the different ads for each party and how they were used in the ads. While many of the statistics were similar between the parties, there were a few that were glaringly different. For instance, only 1% of Obama’s campaign ads show “tears or visually sad” subjects, while 21% of Romney’s ads focused on this pertaining mostly to unemployment and taxes. This makes sense in that Obama is attempting to focus on the positive parts of his past four years and reminding people of their hardships will remind them that it was under during his presidency that these things happened; Romney is using these hardships against Obama to convince voters they don’t want another four years like the past four.

Another drastic difference showed in the number of ads that focused on the elderly, with Obama having 38 ads and Romney only having two. I thought this was interesting because senior citizens are normally thought to be majority Republicans, so then why didn’t seniors appear in more of those ads? It is possible that the Romney campaign believes they have already secured the vote of the elderly and don’t want to waste money, but the Obama campaign is trying to sway more elderly to vote Democrat and so includes more seniors in their ads so that this population feels included under the Obama administration.

One statistic that I thought was interesting was that Obama not only used the American flag in his ads 5 times as much as Romney, but he also made the flag appear in a positive light, while Romney sometimes showed the flag as damaged or burning. In this case I think that Obama has the right idea on this strategy. Romney is trying to show that under Obama we are not safe and the country is disintegrating, but at the same time he should try to also use the flag in a positive light while talking about the American future under his presidency. I feel like positive and progressive outlooks are more effective than just looking at the past and only talking about what went wrong in the past.

Overall these statistics showed me how the candidates use different subjects to evoke certain emotions in their audiences. Even the same subject matter can be utilized to provoke very different reactions depending on the context. This article gave me insight into what the candidates are most concerned about and their strategies for dealing with those issues.