Clinton or Trump Will Be Next President Whether You Like It or Not

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-california-congressional-races-poll-20161104-story.html

     In this article the author, Phil Willon, highlights how reluctant the two political parties are to work with one another once the election is over. A new USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll collected data about California voter's opinions on the two candidates and what they believe should be done if their preferred candidate were to lose. Whether Hilary Clinton or Donald Trump wins, supporters of the losing candidate favor to have their member of Congress to "act as a check and balance" of the newly elected president, rather than working together with the victor's party. Along with opposing the cooperation between the parties, it was also shown that California's voters had unfavorable impressions of both candidates, "69% of California's voters had an unfavorable impression of Trump. For Clinton, 42% of voters had an unfavorable impression of the former secretary of State" making the next president to have the highest unfavorability ratings in recent history. The polarization has become so extreme that although both sides believe compromise is important, neither want to be the first to do so. Senate candidate Kamala Harris mentions that despite the political parties differences, the two need to come together and put the country first in order to get things done. 

Questions to consider:

1. How much of politics should be about checks and balances as opposed to compromise and working together?

2. Do you think Washington's gridlock problem can be fixed, if so what are the steps that need to be taken in order to do so?

3. What are the pros and cons of having a two-party system? 

California's proposition battle over capital punishment

Californians sharply divided on death penalty (Proposition 62 & 66)

This Tuesday, Californians will vote on an overwhelming 17 state ballot measures. Among them are Proposition 62 and 66, two rival ballots that, if passed, would bring "historic changes to California’s fractured death penalty," according to Sacramento Bee writer Alexei Koseff in her article "Californians sharply divided on death penalty ahead of historic vote." Surveys show Proposition 62, which would repeal capital punishment in California, passing by a slim margin. Proposition 66, however, aims to do the opposite: resume executions after more than ten years and speed up the appeals process for death sentences. This proposition has experienced a rapid rise in polling numbers within the last week with now 48% of voters for the prop and 42% opposed (the rest undecided). With both propositions appearing likely to pass, as they are opposing propositions the one with the higher number of votes would become law. While it seems odd that both could pass (as this scenario means that a significant number of voters are voting 'yes' on both), supporters of both propositions have the same criticism of the current capital punishment system in California: it's broken. Many voters are driven by pragmatic views of the death penalty rather than moral or religious ones. Both propositions would reform (or abolish) a costly and ineffective system, which some believe to be the real issue at hand rather than the idea of capital punishment itself.

Questions to consider

1. Where do you stand on each proposition and why?

2. How does your political identity, race, religion, or ethnicity influence your position on the death penalty? And if it doesn't influence your position on the death penalty, why not?

3. These ballot measures are two of 17 that Californians have to vote for this Tuesday. Is 17 too many propositions? Why or why not? 

4. What are the benefits and downsides of having such a large number of propositions to vote on?

The Third Presidential Debate

Presidential Debate: What You Missed

In their article “Presidential Debate: What You Missed,” New York Times writers Alexander Burns and Matt Flegenheimer go over the key moments of the third and final presidential debate. On Wednesday evening, much controversy surrounded candidate Donald Trump, who refused to state whether he would accept the results of the election. This action builds on his previous allegations that the democratic system is “rigged” in his opponent's favor. Unsurprisingly, Hillary Clinton called Mr. Trump's remarks “horrifying” and “dangerous,” reminding American voters that we should have a greater degree of faith in our democracy if we wish to see it continuously function. The discussion regarding faith in democracy was by far the most controversial and publicized, somewhat overshadowing the discussions on national debt and abortion, which were also heated. Trump’s cynical comments about our democracy, as well as the notion that he may oppose the peaceful transfer of executive power, could lead to a lower degree of voter efficacy. Many share in the sentiment that our government operates through inefficient or undemocratic means, citing the power of influences such as PACs as well as backroom deals. The fact that a controversial political outsider like Donald Trump, who seems skeptical of our democratic system itself, is a major party nominee bodes poorly for our nation.

1. Young Americans have a low voter turnout rate. Why is this and how could comments like Trump’s further impact young Americans?

2. What will happen if voters begin to lose faith in our democratic system?

3. How does the media’s discussion of the third presidential debate influence our thoughts about the issues discussed and our opinion on who won?

The power gerrymandering has given Republicans in 2016

In his article “The power that gerrymandering has brought to Republicans” Julian E. Zelizer discusses the power gerrymandering has given Republicans in 2016. With the way districts are setup now, in most states being determined by state legislatures that are part of a political party, it is impossible for democrats to regain the House until at least 2020 (which is when the next US census is taken and the districts are redrawn). No matter by how much of a landslide Hillary Clinton beats The Donald by, it’ll be impossible for democrats to retake the house even with down-ticket voting having a large effect on the Senate and House races. Unsurprisingly, the author claims that the Republican success has been largely due to gerrymandering and that it is one of the primary causes for gridlock on capitol hill as Republican incumbents have little to worry about as their re-election is almost guaranteed. The fact that in a democratic system it is possible to keep seats in congress just because of the setup of districts which are determined by state legislatures which are affiliated with a political party is very disheartening.

1. Young Americans already have a very low political efficacy, with Gerrymandering becoming more well known is it a possibility for them to stop because young Americans will wonder if they are even making a change?
2. How much of an effect does Gerrymandering have on gridlock and why?
3. Should all states adopt a system similar to that of Californias to decide districts.

What Trump Reveals about Executive Powers and democratic Attitudes 



Trump’s Threat to Jail Clinton Also Targets Democracy’s Institutions

Summary: In their article "Trump’s Threat to Jail Clinton Also Targets Democracy Institutions," authors Max Fisher and Amanda Taub discuss how the claims Donald Trump has made during his election threaten to undermine the core values of American democracy. The authors focus on Trump’s assertions that he would throw Hillary in jail if elected President. Fisher and Taub claim that Trump's words are a threat to the fundamental pillars of the US government, because he suggests that "he alone could determine her fate," as opposed to institutions such as the police or court system. Trump's arguments that the election system is rigged also questions the democratic process that our government relies on. The authors interviewed political scientist Adrienne LeBas, who found parallels between Trump's rise to power and the methods used by authoritarian leaders in “Zimbabwe, Togo, Ethiopia" who also made "explicit threats to imprison opponents.” Overall, Trump could not completely tear down the American democracy, but he certainly could erode it. In the words of LeBas, "“Our institutions and our democratic orientations and attitudes are far weaker than we think they are.”

Connection: Trump's comments make the reader question what he really could accomplish as President. Executive powers are extremely important, especially with candidates that make such bold claims.

Questions:

1. If elected, could Trump actually follow through with his campaign claims (jailing Hillary, building a wall, etc)?

2. What are the limitations on executive powers?

3. Considering the current state of US politics (gridlock), should the President be given more or less power? Why?

Understanding How Polls Affect Voters

Understanding How Polls Affect Voters

Summary: In the article "Understanding How Polls Affect Voters" economist David Rothschild explains the effect that polls have on voters. Changes in voting affects both parties in any election and if polls have a major effect on voters then polls may be huge in swaying the vote to either party's side. The article goes further into depth by explaining human tendencies and how "majority opinion" helps sway votes. The article also talks about the "bandwagon effect in the political domain" and how its swayed voters through its influence in polls.

Connection: Polling is looked to in every election as a means to tell who is winning and who is losing.  If polling has such a great effect on voters then it is important to understand how and why it affects them.

Questions:
In what ways do polls effect voters?
Why are polls effective in swaying voters?
How will polling's roll change as it becomes more or less reliable and used?

Donald Trump vs The New York Times and the Role of Media in the Election

Donald Trump Threaten to Sue The Times Over Article on Unwanted Advances

Summary:

The New York Times recently published an article featuring accusations from multiple women about sexual advances Republican Presidential Nominee, Donald Trump, made on them.  These accusations come on the heels of a tape release that reveals Mr. Trump bragging about sexually assaulting some women.   This article details the Trump Campaign's reaction to the report by sending The New York Times a threat that they will sue the newspaper for defamation against Mr. Trump.  The New York Times responded by saying they are protected under the First Amendment to publish news worthy information on important topics.  The New York Times finished their response by saying "we welcome the opportunity to have a court set him [Mr. Trump] straight."

Connection:

This feud between Mr. Trump and The New York Times details a debate over freedom of speech that mirrors our recent chapter on media.  The New York Times refusal to retract their article displays the power that the media has due to the First Amendment.  This power can be used for good, like The New York Times spreading important information, or can be used for less good motives, like Fox News.

Questions:

Who is in the right between Donald Trump and The New York Times, why?

Does the print media still have a place in the modern news service?

Does the First Amendment give the media too much power to disseminate information?