Group items tagged

This French perspective on the US electoral process is really eye-opening. As Americans we are desensitized to the fact that vast swathes of our country are effectively ignored in the Presidential election process. However, from an outside perspective this phenomenon appears strange and disturbing. In France, which elects its presidents directly, the electoral college seems to subvert the interests of democracy without a clear purpose. Thus, the analysis of non-swing states addresses questions I would have never really thought to ask. This article focuses primarily on Georgia and South Carolina as examples of this phenomenon. The finding that many individuals in poor and uneducated populations in these states don't know who the Republican candidate is or when the election will occur is shocking and a little alarming, but, upon greater investigation, makes sense. Why would a presidential candidate ever visit either of those states in this day and age?

Let's talk about this one in class!

I mentioned this op-ed in a comment on somebody else's post. I linked it in case anybody was interested.

This is a really interesting perspective on this issue and on interventionist foreign policy as a whole. The current situation in Afghanistan is clearly reflective of a larger pattern of American foreign policy and attempted nation building.

Thank you for the exchange of ideas here, CoPo students. . . . it sure feels lousy to have left Afghanistan. I do wonder what the next 12 months will bring.

This article gives an Arab perspective on the vice presidential debate. There are some interesting choices in words to describe Biden's apparent victory over Ryan Thursday night: "feisty vice president Joe Biden came out swinging" "clashed sharply" "savaged surging" "crackling showdown" "Passionate and adamant". This type of language demonstrates the writers bias toward The democratic party. They also illustrate their bias through their explanation of the mixed post-debate polls. They explain that Ryan's good looks distracted viewers from Biden's stellar points.

I think this site posts very biased articles in general on this election. After the last debate, the report on that seemed incredibly biased towards Republicans, so I think maybe they just go with whoever "won" the debate. It's interesting how the only evidence used in the debate shown in this article is about foreign policy and terrorism, and I agree that it would be interesting to look at something from Iran or the likes.

Good find, Sam! Even if the source shows overt bias, it's good to know what's out there being said about US politics!

Secretary of State Antony Blinken will depart for a five-day visit to Africa to "support democratic principles," and especially to advance diplomacy aimed to prevent a potentially catastrophic civil war in Ethiopia, where there is already extreme violence, that would threaten the stability of East Africa. From my perspective, it isn't often the U.S. or other Western nations engage in diplomacy with African countries, but I could be incorrect. Anyhow, this caught my eye, especially to see if it's effective in heading off what seems to be an imminent civil war in Ethiopia.

My first reaction was to question why any outreach took this long to give. I've personally known about this conflict for months, which means the U.S. government certainly has too. One of the officials was quoted as saying "all the warning signs are flashing," but I feel like they've been more than warning signs for a while now. It just seems that this administration is just always in a defensive position when it comes to foreign policy - like it sweeps issues under the rug until they become too large to ignore. Afghanistan is a great example of this. Hopefully, Ethiopia turns out much better than that.