The countless self-styled “Leftists” who turned up their noses at even the mention of voting for Hillary Clinton in the general election was one of the ways American Leftists failed to realize, fully, how much of America’s safety and reputation, as well as the world’s stability, was at stake in 2016. They failed to see anticipate how terrible the effects a Donald Trump Presidency would be on the lives of so many people across the world – not only Americans. Even more, Leftists failed to see Clinton’s presidential bid as one that stood to advance Leftist politics and mainstream some of the leftmost policy positions ever held by a candidate of a major American political party. These hypercriticisms by Leftists bore the notion that Hillary Clinton was somehow a moral or political equivalent to Donald Trump – that they were but two sides of the same coin. Much of this idea that Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are the same lies in the …show more content…
However, in asserting that Clinton’s experience in governance made her an “elite,” and with the connotations of “elite” being derogatory, she was painted as “out-of-touch” with the disaffected white working-class voters, the self-styled anti-elites. Meanwhile, Trump was able to avoid any charges of elitism, and rather he himself – a literal billionaire – waged that Hillary Clinton was part of this fantastical and conniving “elite” that sought to undermine completely these disaffected voters. Clinton’s failed presidential bid, then, only reinforced to these people – both rightists and leftists – that “elites” are out of touch with regular joes, the proverbial “silent majority,” and must be replaced by populist politicians regardless of their ability to actually govern an entire
American politics have long revolved around the Grand Old Party and the Democratic Party. Arguably every conflict can be drawn back to the exacerbation of these two discordant parties. Both entities refuse to approach middle ground because it would hinder the respective party’s prestige or disobey ideals held for the past two centuries. Being a noted Democratic advocate, forty second US president William Clinton speaks at the Democratic National Convention. Because he employs rhetorical strategies, such as antithesis and procatalepsis, the partiality in his speech not only extols the Democrat’s persona but also degrades the Republican’s image.
Hello. My name is Angie Sykeny, and in this video I’m going to argue that America’s contemporary politics reflect the pluralistic theory of elite power.
middle of paper ... ... This comment suggests that the current idea, liberalism, may just be a phase in human ideology that has spread worldwide. Though he made a compelling argument and posed thought provoking questions that supported his argument, the flaws in his argument, after stringent analysis, contradict his main points. Works Cited Ferguson, C. (Director).
Kernell, Samuel, Jacobson, Gary C., Kousser, Thad, & Vavreck, Lynn. 2014. The Logic of American Politics 6th ed. Los Angeles: CQ Press
The goal of Hillary’s speech is to persuade her audience that her ideas are valid, by using ethos, pathos, and logos. Hillary is the First Lady and Senator, she shows credibility as an influential activist for woman rights. “Over the past 25 years, I have worked persistently on issues relating to women, children, and families. Over the past two and a half years, I’ve had the opportunity to learn more about the challenges facing women in my country and around the world” (Clinton 2).
As you can remember the middle class is the working class that elected Trump and Trumpism into office. Mr. Donald stated in his presidential campaign slogan that he is on his way to “Make America Great Again.” Donald Trump’s presidency uniquely characterizes an opportunity for the middle class to be built and strengthen through policies. In winning his voters hearts Trump used his slogan in gain the trust of his people. Trump appealed to the working-class Americans by promising many changes to the United States system that impose many new
Politics is a subject that sparks numerous debates. However, in most instances, only one side can have the better solution. Extreme liberals are destroying the American political system and way of life. They oppress law-abiding citizens, endorse laziness while keeping the government large and inefficient to run, and too frequently stand behind delusional and hypocritical ideas. A major part of what makes the far left dangerous is their support of policies that restrict constitutional rights.
Policies and statements that may seem like boastful, fraudulent, shenanigans to educated, politically sound Democrats and Republicans alike are nothing but the truth in the mind of Donald Trump, and can be seen on his campaign website, www.donaldjtrump.com. Backed by supporters that seem blind to anyone in the outgroup, Trump is sweeping the polls and booths in nearly every state he visits. Evidently, the stark contrast between what most people believe Americans stand for and Trump’s success via promoting just the opposite begs the question: How can he gravitate so many would-be moderate Republican voters so far to the right of the political spectrum? Aside from his grandiose, overtly blunt
Similar to the corrupt politician portrayed in Parkman's essay, Donald Trump exudes the qualities of a "wretched, wire-pulling demagogue, who is as ignorant as the constituents that choose him" (167-8). The phenomenon behind his success in the 2016 parallels that of corrupt politicians during the Gilded Age. Disgruntled, uneducated masses throw their support at Trump in an effort to rise in social class. However, they mindlessly disregard that Trump is the embodiment of the wealthy upper class which controls much of the issues that upset them. Despite the many political indecencies that Trump has committed, such as acting racist or making outlandish unconstitutional promises, he retains support from many who, similar to Parkman's Gilded Age, "throw their cap up at the claptrap declamation of some lying knave [who] turns from the voice of honesty and reason" (166). Furthermore, his unbelievable attention from news outlets can be paralleled by Parkman's other quality of a corrupt leader who dutifully protects the rights of Americans because it allows "pulpit, platform, and press, to condone his vices" (166). Evidently, the corrupt politician can make promises to a vulnerable nation that are far from plausible, acting as a source of unrest, rather than a calming and reassuring force. As the Gilded Age was ridden with corruption and social turmoil, Parkman understood the
Political elections and votes are determined by the success of each representative’s campaigns. In the film, “Street Fight” by Marshall Curry, describe a life- sequence event of a political battle between two African American political leaders running for mayor of Newark, New Jersey. The first significant aspect I noticed throughout the video was the fight between rich and poor. Cory Booker who was a community leader was challenging the already current mayor in Sharpe James. However, James is a strong political leader who is considered to be political elite. “Political elite are those who get more than others of the values society has available (such as wealth and respect)… Elite often reinforce their position by gaining authority” (Wasserman
William Domhoff’s investigation into America’s ruling class is an eye-opening and poignant reading experience, even for enlightened individuals regarding the US social class system. His book, Who Rules America, exploits the fundamental failures in America’s governing bodies to provide adequate resources for class mobility and shared power. He identifies history, corporate and social hierarchy, money-driven politics, a two-party system, and a policy-making process orchestrated by American elites amongst a vast array of causes leading to an ultimate effect of class-domination theory pervading American society. In articulating his thesis and supporting assertions, Domhoff appeals rhetorically toward an audience with prior knowledge of America’s
Frieden, Jeffry A., David A. Lake, and Kenneth A. Schultz. World Politics. New York: W.W. Norton &, 2013. Print.
The dawn of a new millennium is upon us and we, the Republican Party, are fully prepared to meet the challenges that await us. This past century, due to the resilience and determination of the American people, our country has experienced more growth and prosperity than any other nation in recorded history. However, dark challenges threaten the moral fiber of this great nation. The past eight years, under Clinton’s leadership, the national government has lacked the fortitude to effectively battle the dangerously extremist trends that have gradually forced their way into the American culture. In order for America to be the great nation it once was, the Republican Party must be in power.
Over the past few years, a number of occurrences have displayed the growing economic and political inequality of the United States. The currently dissipated Occupy Movement did draw the general public’s attention to the ridiculous strides made by the rich, whose incomes have skyrocketed within the past four decades. Those pertaining to the middle-income and poor have sadly had their incomes stagnate. According to Caroline Fairchild from the Huffington Post the middle class incomes steadily is on the decline. In 1968 the middle class earned about 53.2 percent of national income in 1968. This number has now fallen to 45.7 percent. Super PACs became a concern as more individual donors willingly wrote up enormous checks to support their particular candidates. As a result, this gave prominence to the growing political inequality, as well as highlighting the rich’s ability to have their words have much more weight over the average citizen in America.
Conservatives fear that globalization will undermined the integrity of a country’s political and social institutions and may weaken its cultural fabric. Leftists are concerned about the prospect of political, technological and economic dependence. Others are concerned over our growing reliance on technology to address complex social and cultural problems (Miller, K., 2012). In addition to this, according to M O’Shaunessy, globalization is not a good thing as it represents the idea that it can be a strong method of social exclusion (2008).