For the Right Reason?

Just Recently, President Obama stated that he supports same- sex marriage.  This statement has caused a huge debate and interest in the people of America, as well as students like us studying the elections.  Many questions have come up about this action that President Obama chose to make. Could this move be political move trying to gain more votes because he feels threatened by Mitt Romney?  Or could it be that he actually feels that same-sex marriage is ok?  I believe that President Obama should make this decision based off of his true belief, not because he is trying to gain support from more people.  Having said that, it is a very smart move if Obama did this to gain more support, even if he doesn’t truly stand by it.  However, we will never truly know the answers to these questions.

Same-sex marriage has always been a “state issue,” but as this issue became bigger and bigger it developed into a “national issue.”  It is playing a crucial role in the elections of officials in our government.  By choosing to support same-sex marriage, Obama is directly going against his republican contenders.  This is a very bold move that could either help him or hurt him.  There are currently thirty states that prohibit same-sex marriage.(1)  This statistic alone shows that Obama’s decision to support same-sex marriage was very risky.  Also recent polls show that “opposition to same-sex marriage rises to 51 percent, compared with 42 percent support.” However, when looking at this statistic one must keep in mind that the majority of people that are against same-sex marriage are republican and it is their belief that same-sex marriage is wrong.  Also, the majority of Republicans will not be voting for President Obama regardless because of the loyalty to their party.

This brings me to my main question that I have already mentioned and briefly talked about.  Did President Obama choose to support same-sex marriage to gain support?  In my opinion he did side with allowing same-sex marriage in order to gain more votes and the support of the homosexual people.  The timing of this decision was also very odd to me as well.  He chose to become public with this idea during the middle of the election process, and when it became clear whom he would be running against.  A poll that was conducted by the New York Times states, “they thought that Mr. Obama had made it “mostly for political reasons,” while 24 percent said it was “mostly because he thinks it is right.”” (2) This just proves that most of America believes that President Obama did this as an act to win the election.

When candidates run for election they use many different tactics and ways to gain support of voters.  Through our studies in government this year we have learned that candidates normally target a specific type of audience, such a young people or older people and many others.  When Obama admitted to supporting same-sex marriage he gained the support of the LGBT.  We will never know weather this action was due to gaining more votes or because he feels that same-sex is right, but we will soon find out if this move helped Obama win or lose the 2012 Presidential election.

(1)http://www.domesticpartnershipflorida.com/gay-marriage-facts-statistics/

(2)http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/15/us/politics/poll-sees-obama-gay-marriage-support-motivated-by-politics.html

Out with the Old, and In with the New

It’s 2012, and modern times are upon us.  I have had the privilege of taking Government during a year for the Presidential Elections.  Since its an election year, my class an I have gotten to take a look inside the election process, especially how candidates market themselves and attempt to sway voters.  In these modern times, candidate’s ways of campaigning to their voters have changed.  With the easy accessibility of the internet, candidates have turned to social media sites in order to reach their voters.  In our Campaign Commercials unit, we learned about some popular campaign commercials through the years such as Nixon’s “McGoverns Defense,” and Reagan’s “Prouder, Stronger, Better.”  After researching campaign commercials as well as creating Twitter accounts for government and being opened to Twitters political influence, I was inspired to further go into the modern form of campaigning.

I took to researching on my own and came upon a New York Times article that explains the instrumental role that technology plays in modern campaigning.  The article focuses on President Obama’s use of the internet in the 2008 and compares it John F. Kennedy’s use of television in his running for presidency.  Arianna Huffington of the Huffington Post argues that,“Were it not for the Internet, Barack Obama would not be president. Were it not for the Internet, Barack Obama would not have been the nominee.” One of the most popular social media sites utilized by candidates is Twitter.  Presidential candidates have taken to Twitter to campaign to the public through the convenience of the site and the ability to develop seemingly personal relationships with their constituents.  To add some factual evidence to the overwhelming introduction of technology to campaigning and the presidency; President Obama has 15,471,940 follower on Twitter!  That staggering number confirms that modern times are upon us and presidential campaigning has taken a turn down the road of technology.

 

 

Next, the article focuses on President Obama’s very effective use of YouTube.  President Obama was able to utilize YouTube as free advertising for his campaign.  Instead of paying for millions in commercial costs, he was able to show millions of people his message through YouTube.  President Obama’s most famous YouTube video has collected a little over 24 million views.  Not only is the way of campaigning changing, but it is affective.  Joe Trippi, who ran Howard Deans campaign in 2004 states, “The campaign’s official stuff they created for YouTube was watched for 14.5 million hours.”  He then confirmed that, “To buy 14.5 million hours on broadcast TV is $47 million.”  This is a perfect example of how campaigning has used modern technology as a beneficial way of communicating to the public.

 

It is obvious that campaigning has become modernized, and it can be seen happening today as campaigning continues for the 2012 election.  However, is it effective?  Does Mitt Romney’s Tweet or President Obama’s YouTube hit actually help the campaigning process?  In response to my study in government class as well as my further studies on the topic, personally I would say the change to modern campaigning is beneficial.  If such a powerful thing such as the internet is being un used, than why not utilize its potential?  Electing a new president is such an important decision and the power of the internet should be used for something so important.  By using technology, Presidential campaigning has become accessible to citizens.  Candidates are able to convey their messages and ideas to millions of followers within seconds which gives candidates the ability to organize their supporters.  Using the internet to campaign has given results and it is effective.  Millions of people follow on Twitter and watch YouTube videos and messages are being conveyed through these sites.  It is truly amazing the impact and the continuing change technology gives campaigning.  As campaigning for the 2012 election continues, I look forward to being able to view and benefit from the use modern campaigning.

Obama’s Support of Gay Marriage: Championing a Change or Ploying for Reelection?

Today, the issue of same-sex marriage is one of the most controversial topics in the UnitedStates.After North Carolina passed Amendment One on May 8th, which bans same-sex marriage in the state, President Barack Obama backed gay marriage later on May 9. With the upcoming election, such a significant decision begs the question, is the President truly trying to make same-sex marriage legal across the nation, or is he trying to gain votes from supporters of gay marriage? According to the Huffington Post, Barack Obama says that, “I’ve always been adamant that gay and lesbian American should be treated fairly”, however, the article also states that the President’s decision will have little political impact because the matter is still being discussed in different lights in many state courts.

Throughout our government class this past year, we examined strategies presidential candidates use to help their campaigns and get elected, including convincing campaign commercials and targeting a young demographic. This study leads me to reexamine the President’s recent support of gay marriage. Just as candidates target a demographic of young voters, could President Obama be using this announcement as a strategy to target the demographic of LGBT voters? The President is well aware that passing national same-sex legislation would be nearly impossible, especially due to the amount of states that have banned same-sex marriage (29 states total) greatly outweighing those that allow it (9 states total), according to the graph seen below from the Pew Research Center. During the President’s first run for office, he only supported civil unions between same-sex couples, so it could be argued that his “change of heart” could have the purpose to gain more votes in the race against Governor Romney, which is predicted to be an incredibly close match up.

Despite these inferences of President Obama’s intentions when it comes to his stance on same-sex marriage, his declaration of support may end up not making a difference to voters whatsoever. According to a poll taken by USA Today, 60% of voters say that the President’s announcement will not make a difference on whom they vote for come November. Only 13% of voters say that his support of gay marriage will make them more likely to vote for him, as opposed to 26% reporting that the President’s stance will make it less likely for them to vote for him. Nevertheless, this historical announcement will make for a very interesting election this fall, and if the President is reelected, I will be even more curious as to whether he chooses to take action on his support of gay marriage, or rather abandons a route of action for a change.