The 2008 Presidential Elections:Do Polls Really Predict the Future

The 2008 elections have been the earliest starting Presidential elections in history. The Presidential hopefuls started to per sway people since very early on in the year. Now as the primaries for many states are just around the corner the heat in this race starts to build even more. On going polls try to predict the outcome of these primaries but the question is can polls really predict the outcome of the primaries? I believe that there is good chance that if more than one poll has similar predictions it ends up being correct and reliable.

Many polls say that it is very like that Hillary Clinton will be running against Rudy Guiliani in the 2008 Presidential race (shown at right). For most of the year these candidates have been neck to neck in popularity ratings. Currently Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton had been ahead Guiliani for three weeks straight but that is not true anymore. "National telephone survey shows former Mayor Rudy Guiliani leading Senator Clinton 46% to 44% in an early look at a general election match-up." However, people are always hesitant in trusting polls. The article Election 2008: Clinton vs. Guiliani and Thompson, states, "One way of addressing this is to look at a rolling-average of three consecutive polls." If polls carry outcomes that do not vary significant than chances are they are a good prediction of expected outcomes. Polls also show that Senator Clinton also has a good chance of running against Fred Thompson. The article, The 2008 Republican Primaries, talks about the recent surveys done by Rasmussen Reports. They show, "that Rudy Guiliani earns 21% of the vote while Fred Thompson (shown at right) attracts 18%." These candidates are so close that in republican priories anything can happen. A weekly survey conducted by Rasmussen Reports show that when Hillary is put head to head against Thomson the results show her at 47% of popularity vote while Thompson only attains 45% of the vote.

Rasmussen Reports conducts surveys on a daily basis to keep track of how these presidential candidates are doing with the people. Out of eleven surveys, seven surveys show that Guiliani and Clinton have managed to be within two points of each other. However Senator Clinton seems to have an advantage over Guiliani. "During the first eight sets of three-poll averages, Giuliani was "ahead" in seven and tied with Clinton in the eighth. Clinton has held the advantage in the last three updates of the three polls rolling average. She currently leads 47% to 44%." This is definitely good news for all those democrats who are in support of Senator Clinton. Furthermore Rasmussen Reports shows that "Currently, in the three poll rolling average, Clinton leads Thompson 49% to 41%." These numbers should not be surprising since these candidates are the most popular in people's list. These numbers show that Thompson is doing pretty well since this is the closest that he has been to Hillary Clinton since polls have been done.

Today an article was released which showed that Clinton is also attracting about 18% of the Republican women vote. However the downfall to this is that some national polls also say that she is loosing about 20% of the vote of democratic man. It is not really known the exact reason for this although there are speculations that this is a gender related issue. As talked about in previous posts there are still men in this country who do not think that a woman is ready to take such a leadership position. This off course is a controversial issue because the latest national polls conducted by Rasmussen Reports say "Just 13% of American voters now say it's Very Likely that Democrats will nominate a white male candidate for President. That's down from 24% in late August." These results would make people think that America seems to be preparing itself for a major change in leadership. One can assume that if this poll were to be correct that maybe the American people are opening their mind to change and begun to think that Senator Clinton could take this country into a progressive future. This can prove to be very true since there is only one white democratic male candidate pulling in double-digit popularity ratings, John Edwards. Surveys since August have shown that about 76% of the country has said, "They are willing to cast their Presidential vote for a woman." Furthermore about 79% of voters say they are willing to vote for an African American. The most open to the idea of voting for a candidate who is not a white male seem to be majority voters under the age of thirty. This can mean that these candidates are doing something good by campaigning with the youth of America.

Whatever the results are, these elections will be something to talk about for years to come. There is so much unprecedented being seen here. The amount of money spent during this election seems will be reaching breaking record numbers. We have the first female running for president as well as the first African American. We have also seen that candidates started campaigning so early in the year. Voters have certainly been viewing and hearing so much publicity on these candidates in hope that there decision the day of the primaries will be so much easier. Now all we have left to do is hope that the best man or woman for the job wins and that they can better guide this country and our citizens.

A Look at Women in Politics

This country has evolved from a nation where it was acceptable to own slaves to a nation that through the years gave all men and women the opportunity to be equal. Not lone ago women were suppressed to being housewives. Men thought that their place was in the kitchen and finally women became tired of it and fought for their rights. It was not until 1920 that women earned the right to vote. It is now amazing to see how many women hold governmental positions or are involved in politics. We can still see skepticism in men and their thoughts on the ability of women to lead especially now that there is a possible chance for a women president. I believe that over the years women will be showing up in politics through governmental positions more. Uncertainty might exist towards the ability of the female gender to execute a governmental job yet as the years pass women will show that we can perform a governmental job just like men or who knows maybe even better.

Looking back at when women began to show their presence in politics I found that the first woman to serve in the Senate was Rebecca Latimer Felton (at the right.) According to the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress, she was appointed by the "Governor as a Democrat to the United States Senate on October 3, 1922, to fill the vacancy caused by the death of Thomas E. Watson." The interesting fact about her term was that she only served for twenty-four hours. However, one can conclude that she opened the door for more women to feel like they can take on such a position. The first woman to be elected to the Senate was Hattie Wyatt Caraway. She was elected in a special election to fill the remaining month's left in her husband's term. Hattie Wyatt Caraway was then elected by Arkansas to serve for two more terms. Her terms as Senator were important because she held important positions in the Senate which had never been held by a women before. For example, "Hattie Caraway in 1933 became the first woman to chair a Senate Committee and in 1943 became the first woman to take up the gavel on the Senate floor as the Senate's presiding officer." I think that this was important because women start to show that they really are equal to men. Here we begin to see that the positions men once thought only a man could do were not only for men after all. "To date, thirty-five women have served in the United States Senate, with sixteen serving at this time."

Women have also showed up in the House of Representatives. The first woman elected to the House of Representatives was Jeannette Rankin, in November 1916. She was the first woman to be part of Congress. The fact that she was elected to Congress was remarkable because women did not get the right to vote until 1920 so we can safely assume she was elected by men. Since then "243 more women have served as U.S. Representatives or Senators." Two hundred and forty three is a remarkable number considering the fact that women were oppressed by men for so long. According to the women in congress website, "In total there have been 209 women Representatives, 28 Senators, and seven women who have served in both chambers." The numbers also show that thirty-seven of those women who have served in Congress come from minority ethnic backgrounds. This shows the way America is evolving and accepting change in old conservative ideas in where the women had no place to belong to but home.

Now we see another commotion begin because we have Hillary Clinton, running for President. It should not be shocking to America that a woman could have the capability to run a country when throughout the years women have shown they have the capability of taking on leadership positions. In the 1984 elections Geraldine Ferraro (shown in the left) became the first woman to run for vice president but was was defeated by the incumbent Reagan and his running mate Bush. Who is to say she would not have been a great leade? Twenty-four women in the House of Representatives have chaired congressional committees. "Nancy Pelosi (shown at right) of California made history by breaking the "marble ceiling" to become the first woman to serve as Speaker of the United States House of Representatives." She has been the only woman to "hold the top three leadership positions in a major political party." Looking at these facts is it really a shock to think that a women is ready to lead a country. I think that America needs to continue on the road of change because it is change that can lead this country into a better road. If we can leave the prejudices we have against each other because of gender, and work together as intellectual men and women than this country can become a better nation to live in.

Election 2008: The Youth Vote Matters

The 2008 elections have captured the attention of many citizens. Candidates are reaching out more to the youth in this presidential race. Even though in earlier elections there has been a higher percentage of voters "older than 50" this upcoming election will change that. Candidates are seen working harder to get their messages across to high school and college students. According to the Rock The Vote website "young people voted in record numbers in the 2004 and 2006 elections and all signs point to 2008 being even bigger for the youth vote." This offcourse is of great interest to the candidates and it is now crucial that they invest time trying to attain those votes. One of the most critical states for this presidential race is Iowa since their caucases will be first. Just using Iowa one can see how candidates like Clinton, Edwards, and Obama are reaching out to the youth in that state.

The article "BarackStars,' 'Hill Yea!' rally youth for Democrats" , talks about this issue. "Iowa's presidential caucuses are typically a gray-haired affair," yet this year presidential hopefuls are expecting many new young faces to show up and vote. For example in the town of Ames, a seventeen year old high school senior is the "head of Iowa State University's chapter of BarackStars, an organization set up by the campaign with groups throughout the state." At such a young age, Chris Elsenbast (shown at the right) is involved in the world of politics and knows who he wants as president. When interviewed he stated, "I agree with a lot of his policies, but I think he is really like a different type of politician." Just a few miles away in Norwalk, a suburb of Des Moines, Ryan Mc Nulty, age seventeen, has become a volunteer for the Edwards campaign. He became involved after engaging in a discussion about the candidates with his government teacher. Both of these teens will turn eighteen before the caucuses this Winter in Iowa and are ready to show full support to their chosen candidates. It is not only males involved in supporting these campaigns. In Hillary's Iowa youth page we can see that teenage young girls are joining this trend (seen in the left).It is nice to see that our youth are getting involved in the world of politics. It brings great hope that this country will head into a better future if our soon to be adults are becoming aware of the issues and taking the time to become aware to support someone who they think can take the country to a better state.




This is not the first time that the youth of America seem to be more involved in politics. According to rockthevote.com, in 2006, youth voter turnout was higher than usual. The article Young Voter Turnout Surges In 2006, explains the increase seen in youth voters in the last two elections. The 2002 elections showed, 18-29s comprised 11% of all votes cast. In the 2006 election, 18-29s cast 13% of the votes. "This is a significant result, considering that young people are actually a smaller share of the electorate in 2006 than they were in 2002, and also that turnout overall in the 2006 election appears to be up from 2002. The data shows that the increase in voter turnout for 18-29 year olds in 2006 significantly outpaced the overall population turnout increase." This data could be the reason why candidates decided to focus on our younger voters. This article also shows that in the 2006 House and Senate elections, "CNN's national exit polls show young voters favored Democrats by a 22-point margin, nearly three times the margin that Democrats earned among other age groups." Now Republicans must be feeling the pressure to get these new voters on their side if theyw ant to take a lead over the Democratic candidates.

The question now rests on how the youth of America is likely to vote for the upcoming 2008 elections. A survey conducted by the Pew Research Center showed that teens are interested in the upcoming elections, "38% of 18-29 year olds have watched candidate debates, about the same percentage as 30-49 year olds (36%) and 50-64 year olds (42%). Young adults were also very likely to report finding the debates useful: more than three-quarters (77%) of 18-29 year olds said the debates helped them learn about the presidential contenders, compared to 56% of those 65 years and older." I think that seeing the crisis the world seems to be in has motivated younger citizens to learn and get involved. The Pew Research Center also discovered that You Tube/CNN debates are appealing to those voters under age 30. This goes to show that technological advances may be effectively helping presidential hopefuls. The Pew Research Center also investigated the affiliation of these young voters and they came up with similar results than those of RocktheVote.com. A higher percentage of youth seems to vote in favor of democrats than republicans. However, nothing is set in stone and the outcomes can turn out to be different from the polling results. We just have to wait and see how accurate polls can be in predicting the outcomes of elections.

Freedom of Speech: Does the Media Allow Politicians to Speak Freely?

It is believed that this country is a free country. The Constitution states in its First Amendment that as American citizens we have freedom of speech. I interpret this as the ability that one has to express the way one feels about the different issues in society. However one of the most talked about issues in today's news was how people are criticizing Senator John McCain (shown at the left) for expressing his opinions about religion in politics. There are many articles that address this issue and they try to bring people to one conclusion. McCain is a bad person because he chose to express what he believes would be best for this country. Here we see a clear example of how the media can misunderstand a politician's words and interpret them their own way which, many times tends to be a negative way.

According to CNN, in an interview with "Beliefnet, a Website that covers religious issues and affairs," McCain stated "I just have to say in all candor that since this nation was founded primarily on Christian principles, personally, I prefer someone who has a grounding in my faith." After this article we see that "Muslim and Jewish groups on Monday sharply criticized Sen. John McCain's comments that he would prefer a Christian president to lead the United States." This was brought up to McCain's attention who responded angrily when he saw how his words were misinterpreted. He said, "I believe that anyone can be president of the United States of any faith" but made it clear "there's nothing I can do about it." I think that this was a fair rebuttal because it is true. He expressed what his personal opinions were about this issue and he should not be condemened by people for taking advantage of his freedom of speech.

MSNBC goes further to report that on this same interview with Beliefnet McCain was asked, "if a Muslim candidate could be a good president." McCain answered by saying "I just have to say in all candor that since this nation was founded primarily on Christian principles ... personally, I prefer someone who I know who has a solid grounding in my faith...But that doesn't mean that I'm sure that someone who is Muslim would not make a good president." This shows that he is not stating that only someone of his faith has the ability to be president. He at no point is expressing that his religion is the correct one or putting other religious down. The media is quick to manipulate his words. They seem to do this thinking only of their own personal gain. Usually, they use this manipulation of words as a headline in the interest of selling papers or having a large amount of online readers.

Other religious groups seemed a little upset at McCain's words as well. In CNN's article "Groups criticize McCain for calling US "Christian Nation", "Ibrahim Hooper(shown at the right), spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said McCain's comments failed to recognize that Christianity is not the only faith with beliefs that support the concept of human rights." Hooper added that McCains comments "go against the traditions of American pluralism and religious pluralism and inclusion." I have read articles in which McCain clarifies that people should elect their president because he or she is the most qualified person not because of their religion. As with most Americans, the issues and candidates' expirience play an important role to his decision.

This is an important topic when it comes to politics because I feel that politicians are striped of their First Amendment rights.The stress the media puts on these politicians, in part play a role in the reason some politicians are untrustworthy. They do not allow politicians to speak freely. Politicians are forced to be more careful in what they say and construe their words based on what is socially correct. This is a problem becuase at times we get politicians who say things they do not really believe in. Off course this is a serious problem when a politician is elected and begins to act according to what his beliefs are and not what he may have previously stated. It begins not to matter much if the country agrees or not. We end up with a government that is untrustworthy and with a society that seems to become more careless to engage in things like voting because they feel their voice does not matter to the government.