Politics There Were A Few Things That Essay

PAGES
5
WORDS
1445
Cite

Politics There were a few things that changed in American political culture between 2004 and 2012. The political culture became more polarized, as media and political rhetoric escalated significant following the 2008 election. The political landscape was change by the 2008 election, which saw an expansion of red states, and renewed interest in politics from African-Americans and Hispanics, two groups that traditionally vote Democrat. The heightened rhetoric can be seen as something of an extension of culture wars, where conservatives and liberals alike seek to more clearly define their positions on both economic and social issues. Socially, Americans have become more liberal on many issues, but there is still a divide with respect to economic issues.

National security, social issues and the economy were three key issues in 2004 and 2012. While Bush gained among conservatives for his national security policy, he performed miserably among liberals. Obama took the middle road on national security issues, perhaps so as not to look too weak. On economic issues, Bush benefitted from a strong economy in 2004, but Obama was able to overcome a weak economy in 2012, largely because of social issues and because the economy was at least trending in the right direction. Social issues seemed to be a key point of voting in 2012 in particular. The Bush re-election was not as focused on these as on national security and the economy, but Obama was able to overcome liberal misgivings about national security and the sluggish economy with positioning opposite to Republican hawkishness of social issues. This gave Obama a strong edge with younger and urban voters. The increasing starkness of political divisions between the two parties seemed to work against Romney and the Republican Party as their positions appeal only to a minority of American people. They have chosen positions that will win them votes in primaries, but not in a general election, allowing Obama to...

...

Americans in 2008 were already tired of Bush's foreign policy incompetence, so they could not forgive a sinking economy. Obama's four-year upward trend may have been slow, but it was enough to set the economy back as a major issue. The Republicans appeared to spend too much effort on smear campaigns, and failed to convince a skeptical electorate on the merits of economic principles -- having brought the country to recession under Bush, Republicans needed to make a stronger case in favor of their economic program. With a major influx of new voters who are either young or Hispanic, Republicans missed an opportunity to sell these new voters on their social and economic ideas, the former of which seem rooted in the past and the latter of which have some merit but that merit was not really discussed. Voters still want leaders with whom they can connect. Obama and his policies were better at that. In 2004, Bush and Kerry had such similar backgrounds, that Bush's personableness and the state of the economy had voters overlook his deficiencies.
If there was an element of culture war to the 2012 election in particular -- but also in 2008 -- what are those cultures? Are they new? Are these new cultures redefining the American political map? We've seen Obama turn red or purple states into solid blue -- places like Ohio, Michigan, New Mexico and even Florida seem little in doubt any more. As the political parties seem to be moving to a more polarized dynamic, it forces people to choose between very different worldviews. One thing that comes from the 2012 election is that the Republicans did a poor job of either defining a worldview that could get them elected or of selling it -- Obama didn't win because liberals were in love with his performance, which was that of a fairly conservative President, the ACA notwithstanding.

So there are definitely some issues that have been raised, in particular whether the electoral map has changed. While conservative ideology is by definition slow to change, the world today seems to be moving ever more quickly. It could be that 9/11 gave Bush an opportunity to win, which otherwise stalled a trend towards progressive values and progressive Presidents. A large demographic of young people has joined the…

Sources Used in Documents:

Response #2. Some good analysis here. I think your understanding of 2004 as an election for Commander-in-Chief is excellent, and in that Kerry did nothing to distinguish himself to undecided voters. I am not sure about two other points you've made. I don't think the Republicans in 2012 did much to appeal to minority voters, and many candidates actively turned them off with their views on rape and immigration reform. That was cited by many media outlets as a critical tactical error that handed key states to Obama. There was even talk that Texas, being a minority-majority state, could turn blue at some point in the future.

I am also curious about the point about Kerry positioning as the opposite to Bush. It's true that America wasn't really looking for the opposite of Bush -- at least not the undecided voters -- but I think it is also true that Kerry was far too similar to Bush. They're both rich white guys who didn't make their own money, went to Yale, were in skull & bones and the whole thing. It was pretty silly of the Democrats to position a guy so much like Bush (at least superficially) as the opposite.

The Bush strategy was strong in that election, focusing on war time. In a sense, I wonder if Obama did much the same thing in 2012, only with the economy. Certainly there was a message there that 2012 was not a good time to blow up Obama's economic plans, the ACA, and roll back social progress. This was a good tactic for Obama since the economy wasn't actually that strong -- quite similar to the 2004 Bush position, where the war wasn't popular or effective but change was effectively positioned as a threat to success. It was a good strategy on both counts. Perhaps the Republicans in 2012 would have performed better if they were proposing such radical departures from existing policy.


Cite this Document:

"Politics There Were A Few Things That" (2013, April 15) Retrieved April 23, 2024, from
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/politics-there-were-a-few-things-that-89620

"Politics There Were A Few Things That" 15 April 2013. Web.23 April. 2024. <
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/politics-there-were-a-few-things-that-89620>

"Politics There Were A Few Things That", 15 April 2013, Accessed.23 April. 2024,
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/politics-there-were-a-few-things-that-89620

Related Documents

Politics of the Common Good In Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do? (2009), Michael J. Sandal argues that politics and society require a common moral purpose beyond the assertion of natural rights like life liberty and property or the utilitarian calculus of increasing pleasure and minimizing pain for the greatest number of people. He would move beyond both John Locke and Jeremy Bentham in asserting that "a just society can't

Politics of Information Management The art of information management is widely known as the tactic of policy makers guiding the policy followers into doing so. Therein comes the practice of politics and it is known that politics portends power; consequently understanding power and its application to the art of information management is both appropriate and timely. Organizations now have been proliferated by computers to an extent that they control the entire

Politics has never reached the importance in people's daily lives as it has any time before in history. In today's world, the globalization trend has made all of our lives interconnect whether we are aware of these connections or not. Furthermore, our world population has become so large that the competition for natural resources, especially non-renewable ones, has become an intense rivalry among many different nations and even some of

I think the state should be neutral, and there should be opportunities for everyone, but that is not real life. I think that men mostly run government, but to call states patriarchal seems too extreme for me. I believe that there will be more opportunities for women both in government and the private sector, and that this is a wiser and less volatile outlook than the more radical feminist

Politics As was expected, the Republicans took the House and Senate in the 2014 mid-term elections, shifting the balance of power in the United States government. The election was viewed by many as a referendum on President Obama's policies. The President said it (Martosko, 2014), conservative talking heads said it (Krauthammer, 2014), and voters in exit polls said as much, too (Raedle, 2014). This argument makes for fine political rhetoric, this

Politics, Trade and Unregulated Markets According to Frankline (April 15th, 2008), when a nation increases its public consumption, it reduces the amount of money that companies need to invest in production; therefore, in a way, that nation buys it way out of unemployment. Frankline claims that this is based on a formula devised by John Maynard Keynes nearly a century ago. The formula says that if you increase public consumption, you