Showing posts with label Republican. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Republican. Show all posts

Thursday, August 2, 2012

Focus Group Summary Data : What We Learned About Young Voters in 2012 Presidential Campaign


During spring 2012, members of the COM 398: Controlling Spin class conducted four separate focus groups to determine how engaged young voters (defined as between 17-30) were in the presidential primary.  Specifically, we wanted to determine what issues or concerns were affecting their perceptions of the 2012 campaigns, how they acquired political information about the race, the level of their affiliation with political party or ideology, and their assessment of how effectively the presidential primary campaigns were at addressing their interests.

Four focus groups were conducted, two within the COM 398 class, one with students in COM 102 and a fourth at the Bigler High School Journalism Conference held at Wilkes University on April 13. A total of 43 individuals participated, almost evenly split between females and males.  Specific demographic breakdowns will be included with each focus group.

(1) FG#1        

5 males and 5 females; all 10 were registered voters.

Political affiliation: 5 registered Democrats, 3 registered as Independents and 2 as Republicans. All 10 were Wilkes University Communication Studies majors enrolled in the COM 398 class and had been following the 2012 presidential primary throughout the semester.  Ages ranged from 19-23.

Issues that they wanted to hear about in the 2012 presidential campaign, in order of frequency: (a) jobs; (b) growing student loans and debt; (c) making the educational system a top priority (not just higher education); (d) gay rights (including marriage)/civil and human rights; (e) health care, and (f) issues of women’s rights.

Excerpts regarding “issues” from discussion:

“Outsourcing jobs to India and China—especially Apple’s iPod in China, is affecting jobs here. Production jobs need to be returned here…we need federal incentives for businesses to in-source jobs in U.S.”

“The poor job market combined with escalating college loan debt, functions as a double-edged blow to my generation’s ability to create a secure future.”

“I will leave college with over $50,000 in college debt. It will take many years to pay that down, even if I get a job after graduating in May.”

“Education should be the last program cut when budget cuts are applied.”

 “We need to stop accepting poor teaching…and graduating students who fail.”

“The U.S. is long past the point of singling out a group as being unprotected by their civil rights, including marrying whomever they choose.”

“Gay marriage is an issue of civil rights and equality—and not religion.”

“My recent visit to a local emergency room would have cost over $14,000, but I was covered by my parent’s insurance. I support Obama Care.”

“We need to make contraceptives available to everyone. Do not outlaw birth control.”

Birth control is a health care issue for many people. I strongly disagree with candidates who link birth control to religion and morality. For me, birth control is a health issue, and not always used as a contraceptive.”

When asked how candidate character and personal traits, as well as campaign strategies, might influence who they vote for in 2012, FG#1 mentioned in rank order: (a) being relatable; (b) honesty; (c) stop negative ads; (d) demonstrate foresight and long-term vision for the country; and (e) stop using devil/god terms; left/right polarizing language.

Excerpts from FG#! On “candidate character or traits” that will
Determine who they will vote for in 2012:

“Be relatable. If you want my vote you should not be condescending when speaking to or about young voters, middle-class voters or women.”

 “Put constituent needs ahead of self-interests.”

“Honesty is the key. Determining who is honest is very hard in a political campaign.”

“Please embrace nonpartisanship—I am so sick of campaigning in Republican or Democratic terms. Address the whole nation’s needs.”

“Stop the negative ads!  I tune them out.”

“In this election I can’t tell if an ad is the voice of the candidate or funded by some multi-millionaire PAC. The ugliest ads that attack others get away with it because a PAC sponsors it. This election’s ads are nastier than ever.”

“We really need campaign finance reform—now.”

“ I know people want to hear how a candidate will make their lives better right now. But I expect a President to have foresight, long-term vision for how we can move forward.”

“Polarizing language, like devil/god terms insult me. Don’t candidates realize young voters can see right past those cheap tactics?”

The group was also asked how they get their information about the presidential campaign.  Acknowledging that this specific group may be better informed than most because of their enrollment in this class, they acquire information about the 2012 campaign from: (a) conversations with their friends who follow politics; (b) Twitter from on-line news sources; (3) on-line news, mostly headlines from CNN; (d) Jon Stewart and the Comedy Channel; and (e) a tie between blogs and local newspapers.

Excerpts regarding how they acquire political information:

“I learn the most from our conversations in class and outside of class. I am interested in why my friends feel the way they do about the election.”

“I read CNN headline news…seldom more than that unless it is something that interests me.”

“I get my news on-line. I don’t read local or national papers.”

“Now I get Twitter updates from Politico. I read what comes to me as a text.”

“Most of my friends get their political news from Jon Stewart or the others on the Comedy Channel. I think their sarcasm is more objective than most political newscasts—they ridicule everyone equally.”

“I don’t have the time to watch 30 minutes of news. It doesn’t interest me.”

Comments on how engaged they are in the campaign and the political process over-all, included repeated comments like this following:

I am a registered Independent. I don’t want anything to do with the major political parties. They don’t speak to my needs as a young college student. Maybe I am a Libertarian.”

“Ten years from now, almost no young voters will identify with either the Republican or Democratic party. A real generational divide has emerged and it won’t go away.”

(2) FG #2 

This focus group was conducted in mid-March and involved 4 males and 4 females, all Communication Studies students enrolled in the COM 398 class. Again, they were probably better informed than their peers because of the content of the class. Of the participants, 3 were registered Democrats, 2 were Republican, 1 Independent and 2 were not registered to vote.  Ages ranged from 19-24.

Regarding the issues that mattered to them, they agreed with the topics raised in FG #1, but in addition added the following:

“There needs to be a separation of church and state. That separation should be there but listening to this campaign it is clear the church still influences the political process.”

 “I strongly oppose censorship on the internet. This is actually related to job creation and revenue development.”

 In terms of how they get their political information, this group expanded on the role of social media:

“Everyone our age is reached through the social media—first and frequently.”

“People want to be entertained, especially our generation. That’s why Jon Stewart is a source of campaign information. I watched the GOP primary debate in SC with my friends. And we made fun of everything—the moderator, the candidates and how seriously they took it. We didn’t take it seriously at all.”

“My family is not very politically involved. I was taught that you can’t trust politicians and that they are all liars.”

“I have not been taught how to vote…or why.”

The relevance of the two-party system came up repeatedly in FG#2:

“The two party system is ridiculous; it is judgmental and labels people.”

The parties spend way too much money and spend too much time fighting. That’s just not relevant to me. In fact, it makes me want to stay away from politics.”

“For me, and many of my peers, it’s time for No parties, just people.”

Final note: when asked if they had to vote for President at that time, which of the leading candidates would they vote for, 15 said they would vote for President Obama and 3 for Mitt Romney.

(3) FG#3  

The third focus group consisted of 8 Wilkes students enrolled in COM 102: Principles of Communication class, which is required of Communication Studies, Integrated Media, and some undeclared students. All eight were registered to vote. There were 4 males and 4 females, aged 18-23.  They were asked a similar question protocol as FG #1 and 2. Four of the eight were registered Independent, 2 Democrats, 1 Republican and 1 Libertarian.

Regarding issues or topics that concern them, this FG agreed with FG #1 and 2 and ranked jobs and the economy as the number one issue that concerned them. However, the other issues difference somewhat. Issues in rank order: (a) the economy, specifically jobs; (2) education and (3) and abortion as related to birth control.

Excerpts from discussion of issues in FG#3:

 “No one seems to know how to fix the economy. I will vote for someone who can restore a sense of well being.”

 “Obama is doing damage.”

“I look ahead and I don’t see jobs.”

“Abortion is an issue that will heavily sway who I vote for.”

“I could argue for hours on birth control and abortion, but that is a personal stand.”

When asked how they get their political information, FG#3 expanded the discussion into how they learned anything about politics.

Excerpts from FG#3’s discussion of sources of influence and information:

“I don’t follow politics.” {Mentioned by four participants)

 “My parents never pushed politics, they never encouraged me at all. However, my high school did.”

“In my high school history class, we were given voter registration forms when you turned 18.”

“My parents heavily encouraged me, and politics was discussed daily at home. They are involved in local politics and pushed me to become a Democrat, so I became a fan of the Republicans.”

“I have friends who are active in politics. I listen to them.”

FG#3 participants acquire political information about the 2012 campaign from: (a) friends—conversations and Face Book; (2) SNL and comedy shows; (3) CNN and to a limited degree (4) local papers. Only one follows national news; one follows local news coverage “of the corruption.”

“I get information from CNN on basic issues and the candidates.

“When my friend who is interested in politics posts something on Facebook, if I’m interested I will look.” (Several agreed about getting information from Face Book postings by their friends.)

“I get most of my information—all subjects-- from Face Book and Twitter.”

“I watch Saturday Night Live and enjoy when they make fun of the candidates, esp. after the GOP debates.”

“I talk to peers…that’s where I learn about the campaign.”

“We don’t pay attention to politics, or news in general. I would tell the next generation of young voters to stay better informed and educate themselves, even if they don’t want to.”

“I stay out of political discussions. I don’t like the rift it creates between people.”

FG#3 was also opinionated about the two-party system.

Excerpts on the two-party system from FG#3:

“I am a Democrat and will always be a Democrat. However, I am not blindly voting for someone just because of their party.”

“It [two-party system] works, so why add more parties? That would make it more confusing.”

“The Tea Party is way too extreme.”

“If I have to pick, it would be the lesser of two evils. A no party system makes sense. It should be the person or individual candidate and not the party that shapes voting.”

“Republicans today are what Democrats used to be—militating for change and social reform.”

When asked who they would vote for, if the election were held on the day of the FG, this group had a tepid response. Two said possibly Obama, one possibly Romney and five said they didn’t think they could vote for any of the current candidates

(4)  FG#4. 

On April 13, the fourth focus group was held as part of the annual Bigler High School Journalism Conference at Wilkes University. Knowing the participants would be high school-aged, the questions were adapted to the “next generation” of voters.  FG#4 had 17 participants, 9 males and 8 females. The ages ranged from 14-18. Students were from 6 different high schools in northeastern PA. FG#4 differed from the other three in several key ways. They were younger. They were more politically informed. And, they seemed to have been strongly influenced by the Libertarian Party.  Even though they were from 6 different schools, the affiliation to the Libertarian Party transcended any one school’s influence or location.  If they were to register now, seven of the 17 would register as Libertarians; 4 Democrats; 4 Republicans and 2 as Independents.

(The FG moderator did a follow up on how they were defining Libertarian to make sure they knew what the party was. All seven gave clear, detailed explanations of the Libertarian Party.)

When asked where and how they first were introduced to the importance of politics and voting, their responses were, in rank order: (a) reading on-line newspapers daily; (b) national broadcast media, including on-line broadcasts; (c) classes and teachers at school;
(d) Jon Stewart and Colbert Report and  (e) Twitter and Face Book postings by friends.

Excerpts on sources of information from FG#4:

“I listen to Glen Beck.”

“I have a history class that discusses the election and the parties every day. I get a lot of information from our discussions and my teacher,”

 “I actually watch Jon Stewart and the Colbert Report to learn about the campaign and debates.”

“I follow some blogs and Fox News.”

“I get all of my news on-line. It is easier and faster.”

When asked about the issues that mattered to them, FG#4 participants were both vague and strongly aligned with religion.  They cited the following as issues that concerned them: (a) jobs/employment and  (2) birth control and abortion.  Almost no comments were made on education.

Excerpts on issues from FG #4:

“Life begins at conception. I am pro-life and that shapes my vote.”

“Separation of church and state is important. The Republican views on birth control and a woman’s right to choose are being taken way too seriously.”

“There is a big divide between us and our parents and grandparents. Their issues—social security, Medicare, Iraq—those are not my issues.”

“I will not vote for anyone who supports abortion.”

When asked about the two-party system, FG#4 was the least hostile to political parties. However, they were strongly supportive of third parties, specifically the Libertarian Party. When asked if the election were to be held now, six would vote for Ron Paul, five for Obama and three for Romney. The others had no opinion at this time.

Excerpts from FG#4:

“In the Northern Tier the Tea Party Republicans are solid. I am with them.”

“Government should not regulate business or an individual’s freedom. I am behind Ron Paul.”


Key Take-Away Trends from Four Focus Groups of Young Voters Conducted at Wilkes University - May 2012

Four separate focus groups involving 43 individuals were conducted from March through mid-April by the COM 398: Controlling Spin—News, PR and Politics class at Wilkes University.  The participants ranged in age from 14-24.  Twenty-five of the 43 participants were already registered to vote, with 18 not registered.  After analyzing the data from the focus groups, five key take-away trends among these young voters—and the next generation of voters—suggest a changing electorate.

•Young voters get almost all information about the 2012 presidential campaign from conversations with friends and from social media (especially Face Book and Twitter).  CNN Headline News, Jon Stewart and the Colbert Report were mentioned more often as  “political news sources” than any other broadcast or print sources.

“Everyone our age is reached through social media—first and frequently.”

•There is distrust of the 2-party system among young voters, coupled
with growing registration as Independents among the 18-24 year olds.  Of the 26 participants old enough to register, their registrations included:
            Democrat                  38.5% (10)
            Independent             31% (8)
            Republican               19% (5)
            Libertarian               .04% (1)
            Not Registered         .08% (2)

Of the total 43 participants, including the high school students, while “Democrat” was most often selected, the combined registration as “Independent” and “Libertarian” totaled 42% of the young voters.
            Democrat                  32.5% (14)
            Independent             23% (10)
            Republican               21% (9)
            Libertarian               18.5% (8)
            Not Registered         4.5 % (2)

“Ten years from now, almost no young voters will identify with either the Republicans or Democrats. A real generational divide has emerged and it won’t go away.”

•Issues that concern young voters most are: jobs, mounting student loans and debt, improving quality of over-all educational system, civil rights for gays, including marriage, and separation of church and state.  Regarding issues, age matters. There was a big difference between how 18-24 year olds responded to this question and how the high school students, aged 14-18 responded.

“I graduate in May with $50,000 in debt from college.  I am concerned about my job prospects since I will be paying off loans for years.”

The U.S. is long past the point of singling out a group as being unprotected
By their civil rights, including marrying whomever they choose.”

•Young voters, and the next generation of voters, are very media savvy and see campaigns that use negative ads as divisive. Polarizing language is seen as typical of two-party campaigning.

“Polarizing language insults me, especially god/devil terms. Don’t candidates realize young voters can see right past these cheap tactics?”

“Be relatable. If you want my vote, you should not be condescending when speaking to or about young voters, middle-class voters or women.”

•At the time of the focus groups in March-April 2012, when asked, “If the election were held today, which of the presidential candidates would you voter for” young voters were leaning toward President Obama or not voting at all.
            Obama                        51% (22)
            No One                       19% (8)
            Romney                      16% (7)
            Paul                            14% (6)

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Manipulating The Truth: Rush Limbaugh



Going into this class I need a decent amount about spin, when I was younger I loved Michael J. Fox and his show Spin City taught me about basic spin in politics. Listening to Rush Limbaugh for the past couple weeks has showed me the dark side of spin and how it can be used to manipulate truths to an appalling extent. Not only does Rush use devil terms, he compares Obama to the devil himself. The biblical references match the rhetoric of an insane religious cult and his rants about our country turning to communism match those of a man who built a nuclear safe house during the Cold War.

Joseph McCarthy could listen to Limbaugh’s radio show and consider it unethical. 




February 2- My first day listening to Rush Limbaugh’s show, I discovered his view on Romney, Trump, the media, and Gingrich. If you didn’t know who Limbaugh was, it would take three seconds to realize he is conservative. When discussing Mitt Romney, Rush said “This Romney thing, it’s all about reflexes and it pains me to say this stuff, He just doesn’t have conservative reflexes. It’s like trying to learn golf late in life.” I believe Rush isn’t endorsing Romney, not because he doesn’t agree with his political views, but because he needs Obama to stay in office for rating’s sake. Rush is pulling in over 15 million listeners a week, that number would surely drop if a republican were to be elected president.

Rush says things like he is “Florida’s most important voter”, speaking highly of his endorsement, and “Every time a democrat is elected president, we lose a little bit of this country.” Rush believes the media is too sympathetic towards Obama, Gingrich thinks he can win without money, and at one point returned from a commercial break stating “Are we stupid enough to re-elect Obama,”

February 3, 2012- Today Rush discussed the separation of the Republican party and how they shouldn’t get ragged on for their courage, by courage I believe he meant viewpoints. He discussed job loss from December to January, claiming we lost 2.5 million jobs, over a week after the State of the Union. The method behind Trump endorsing Romney was to get Rush, Palin, and Herman Cain to “sign on to Romney.” Their was also an interesting picture posted on his twitter today, a photo shopped Obama wearing a Robin Hood outfit was posted, symbolizing him stealing from the rich to provide for the poor.

February 7, 2012- Best line of the day, “The Catholic Church is just the latest springboard for the left to advance their agenda. The actual target here is the Constitution of the United States.” Rush was saying today that the Catholic Church’s decision highlights the totalitarian Nature of the Obama Regime.  He made Obama sound like a dictator stating that the government is telling everyone, including churches what they can and can’t do.

February 8, 2012- “Now, what does that mean?  Scarlett Johansson, wizard of smart, you unable to make up your own mind about who to vote for. I'm being asked, "What is Scarlett Johansson's preferred form of dress? I guess from Scarlett Johansson that would be more nude photos, right? Isn't that what she...? Right? Or close to it? And we're gonna start talking about people wear or don't wear? Isn't that what Scarlett Johansson's...? Am I confusing her with somebody? I didn't think so. I didn't think I was.” Rush on Her comments about on Santorum’s sweater vest. Rush talked about how Romney flip flops on standpoints, stating that he is more of an “administrator” and “What we have here is another telling sign of just how similar, if you will, Romneycare is to Obamacare.” Limbaugh’s ability to cherry pick facts in favor of Santorum is astonishing. The only example he offers of Romney’s “flipflopping” is his stand on abortion.

February 9, 2012- When you listen to Limbaugh’s show, you expect a euphemism every other sentence. It’s almost name calling when it comes to being a listener. Today Rush took an interesting angle on attacking the Obama administration. He made it sound as if Obama was succeeding in his plan to morph us into communists. “The problems that we have faced the last three years are primarily due to the fact that Obama did not fail. He has succeeded beyond his wildest dreams.” He also made a claim today that Obama’s economic system is robbing us of our “dignity and potential.”

February 10, 2012- Today’s top story revolved around “angry democrats.” Limbaugh used rhetoric today that a 4th grade teacher would use to teach division, Stating that “The Democrats are angry. Now that’s not news; they’re always angry. What’s got them angry now is a proposal being floated by Republicans.” Rush talked about how Santorum offered clear contrast to Obama’s assault on our freedom, and how our freedom is “ under assault each and every day,”

February 13, 2012- “The country can’t afford Obama. The country cannot afford Pelosi. The country can’t afford Reid. The country can’t afford any more Democrats. The country can’t afford any more socialists. We can afford and we can accommodate and we should elaborate the creation of wealth via hard work.” Said Limbaugh. “Obama is seeking votes from the takers, and promised he will take more from the producers.” I learned that Rick Santorum has conservatism in his bodily fluids. Later in the show a caller blew my mind stating  “I want to say regarding the church, before I get to my point about Santorum, the Bible is very specific that conservatism is from God.  Ecclesiastes chapter 10, verse 2, says a wise man's heart directs him toward the right when a foolish man's heart directs him toward the left.  Straight out of the Bible.” The hot topic of today’s show was that Obama would cut the deficit in half in three years and failed to do so.

February 15th – “If there’s a do-nothing guy, it is Obama, he campaigns as if America’s problem is a do-nothing Congress. He can only get away with this with the help of a report-nothing media.” Rush said Wednesday. Rush also complained about Obama’s plan to cut Nukes by 80%. After two weeks of listening to him rant I am seriously turned off by all four candidates simply because this man and 5 million listeners share this delusional view of government.

February 17th- Today, Rush used his unpolished spin techniques and targeted his female listeners, this quote stuck “The media, the American left, they want to try to convince you that the party of Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin and Liz Cheney hates women. The party of Bachmann and Palin hates women, and the party of the Kennedys and Bill Clinton and Chris Dodd loves women. How does that work?” Rush also celebrated the third anniversary of Obama’s Stimulus package by posting a picture of Obama riding a pig on twitter.

Alexis de Tocqueville
February 20th- Rush preached about the return of Newt and how people aren’t expecting it, but it’s inevitable. Rush also talked about how Tocqueville “foresaw the Obama years.” When Tocqueville said America needs to “avoid the perils of equality,” he was referring to the Obama administration. Rush has now made reference to two pieces of classic literature , the second being the bible.

On my last day, after the last CNN debate, Rush now believes Ron Paul and Mitt Romney are in “cahoots” to bring down Santorum. He said Romney’s goal was to make  Gingrich and Santorum look like insiders, that Romney wasn’t corrupt because he has no federal history.  Listening to Rush Limbaugh, I wouldn’t consider his rhetoric to be articulate with its spin, but I didn’t expect it to be chauvinistic propaganda. His euphemisms were more on the lines of an insult. If Rush was my only sort of media I would be driving a pickup truck with a giant confederate flag sticker on my rear window. He should be banned from the radio waves for being a hypocrite, unethically bias, and bending the weak-minded American’s voter manifesto.


Mikel Hartsough
Communication Studies
Wilkes 2012

Saturday, February 4, 2012

The South Carolina Debate - My Personal Opinion


As a Republican who will vote in the upcoming primaries, I found that Ron Paul was very much in the background for the entire debate and the other candidates made their stand. I noticed all exchanges between candidates were between the other three on the stage. I also noticed that Newt Gingrich does very well at not only defending himself from questions, but throwing them right back at the moderator and making it look like he is right and the moderator is wrong.

The candidates spent some time talking about each other, but they also spoke about the policy wrongdoings of President Obama, which I thought was a good idea. I did not want to hear them attack each other the entire night, which they did not do. The questions were framed more so about the economy and jobs, which I think everyone can agree this was a good direction to go in, because most Americans are concerned with that at the moment.

Personally as a voter, I felt that each of the candidates spoke about what voters wanted to hear. I think that John King spent more time on the minor campaign minutia, than the candidates. When asked a question, some of them gave a few round about answers, but when a policy perspective was presented, they specifically said what they did not like about it and why it was wrong, or they were able to offer an alternative policy. I think those two things are the most important parts of debates, from a voter’s perspective. That is the real substance voter’s need to influence their choices, rather than talking points and commercials.



Ian Foley
Political Science & Communications Studies
Wilkes 2014

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

One Republican to Rule Them All



Last Thursday’s Southern Republican debate was an interesting one.  It separated the men from the boys, the winners from the losers, the strong from the weak.  The obvious front-runners were Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House, and Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts.  Though, Romney didn’t come anywhere close to Gingrich, in my opinion.

In the meantime, Ron Paul, current Congressman for Texas’s 14th District and former dilation measurer, and Rick Santorum, former Pennsylvania Senator, spoke their minds, sure, but they just weren’t as strong or well-liked.

This debate demonstrated that pandering to your audience is key.  Gingrich was spouting out details specifically related to South Carolina, as well as sporting his oft covered-up Georgia accent, like all he was focused on during this campaign was South Carolina.  He mentioned specifically their potential for oil-drilling as well as the utilization of their various ports.

He was prepared with background information on all of the others, including Romney’s stance on abortion and Paul’s military service.  The man had done his research.  He obviously practiced his answers thoroughly.  His team has got to be impressive, considering the fact that his life is riddled in affair-related scandal, yet those most religious are leaning toward him.  This is in spite of Santorum’s decidedly more conservative views on issues such as contraception.  But then, civil rights are not really the focus of this campaign season.

Gingrich’s dodge of the question of his alleged affair and then request for an open-marriage with his second wife made a powerful statement.  It showed that he is confident enough to at least give the image he can rise above such absurdity.  The audience agreed, as well.  The majority of people seemed to be on his side and he really was right in stating questioning of that subject to start off a political debate on a supposedly reputable and serious new station such as CNN was disappointing.  It seemed as if the moderator was trying to pull some kind of a shock-value stunt to make himself look like he asks the hard questions or something, but it completely backfired on him.

The tax discussion was interesting.  Their views on taxation didn’t stick out to me much, but their views on releasing their records definitely resonated with all watching.  Gingrich was the only one who didn’t avoid the question or make an excuse. Not only that, but he was the only one willing to release his tax records and in fact had earlier that day.  The discussion around this made it sound suspicious of the other candidates to withhold this information.  Even Paul—who had the most legitimate reason not to publicize his taxes—claimed he didn’t want to look bad compared to the other guys because he doesn’t make as much, just appeared to be making a lame excuse.  Romney said he’ll release them when this tax season is over, which made him appear to have something to hide, especially since the nomination could be won by then.  Santorum’s “my computer is home” argument was by far the most ridiculous.  It’s not 1980.  People can access their computers from other places.  Plus, there are other ways to obtain these records.  His excuse was an obvious dodge.

Overall, this debate was an effective one.  A lot of good information was provided, character was tested, and in the end, Paul, Romney and Paul were left to walk home with their tails between their legs.  Gingrich, on the other hand, was triumphant and I believed offered up much to be admired in a candidate.  Even if the majority of his views are not congruent with my views and values, he made it clear he has a plan, he has conviction and he isn’t taking anything from anyone.



Cathryn Frear
Communication Studies 
Wilkes 2012

Tuesday, January 17, 2012

2012 South Carolina Debate: Obamacare = Romneycare


Barack Obama was made out to be a villain, a devil and someone to immediately get rid of during the debate Thursday in South Carolina. Heated words did little if anything to help current presidential hopefuls, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Ron Paul.

All four wannabe presidents slated blows against Obama and his current
administration, which could easily be detoured with common sense.  The debate started off with a bang, when Gingrich responded to a question by John King about his ex wife.

Gingrich said to King, "To take an ex-wife and make it two days before the primary a significant question in a presidential campaign is as close to despicable as anything I can imagine.” This self-pronounced hate for the media is not necessarily a good thing being that most of our country bases their perception through the media. What would this heated anger to do for our country? Gingrich might have merited respect of voters in South Carolina, but do we want an easily irritated president; a president that can’t manage to maintain his composure? It seems that Gingrich has consistently shown this irritability throughout the primaries thus far. His inability to control himself will inevitably hurt him down the road.

Gingrich spoke out against Obamacare and spoke of his experience in that aspect leading the charge against “Hilarycare” in the house.  Then made a jab at Obama by saying, “I'd love to do a three-hour Lincoln-Douglas debate with Obama,” “He can use the teleprompter. I'll just rely on my knowledge." Even though reading a teleprompter speech versus a memorized speech has little to do with anything.

Much of Rick Santorum’s attacks focused on a person from his own party, Mitt Romney. Santorum grilled Romney about his Massachusetts health care legislation bill, calling it “Romneycare.” “When he was governor of Massachusetts, he put forth "Romneycare," which was not a bottom-up, free-market system. It was a government-run health care system that was the basis of "Obamacare." And it has been an abject failure, and he has stood by it,” said Santorum. This nit picky fighting between parties will inevitably divide Republicans and the rest of our nation when it comes to a Republican nomination. It is easy to see that Santorum is just trying to claw back into the race with low blows. This constant fighting between candidates leaves an easy weakness, their lack of loyalty to their party.

Mitt Romney repeatedly used his all too familiar go-to strategy of focusing everything back on Obama. Romney said things like “I know we're going to hit it hard from President Obama, but we're going to stuff it down his throat and point out it is capitalism and freedom that makes America strong.” When asked if there was anything he would have done differently in his campaign he said,  "I wish I took all the time I spent talking about one of these guys on stage and spent it talking about Obama." Romney looked a bit off when trying to relate to American people, he said, "I've lived in the real streets of America." This statement is a bit off-putting because Romney is a multi-millionaire, multi-millionaires don’t live on the real streets of America.

Ron Paul barely had a voice during this debate. At one point the crowd started screaming when John King skipped him on an abortion question. Paul was allowed little say in this debate but when he was given a chance, he shouted out to his military donors.

Overall, the winner of this debate was definitely Newt Gingrich led solely on Gingrich’s ability to react very hostilely toward John King at the very beginning thus creating momentum throughout the debate. Romney was overshadowed by Gingrich’s aggressive behavior and attacks at his own expense regarding similarities between Romney’s “Romneycare” bill and Obama’s “Obamacare” bill.

Bryan Calabro
Communication Studies/Integrated Media
Wilkes 2013