I talk to an international affairs expert about what the policy of a Trump administration will look like, and I talk to international students at Kennesaw State University about their opinion of Trump and his future as president.
https://soundcloud.com/user-484985836/president-donald-trump-and-the-new-us-direction
A 22-year-old journalist's take on politics and new media. Combining hard news, human interest, and humor to better reach loyal readers.
Showing posts with label presidential campaign. Show all posts
Showing posts with label presidential campaign. Show all posts
Saturday, November 12, 2016
The World View, Episode 4: President-elect Donald Trump
Thursday, May 26, 2016
Trump's the GOP nominee -- Now what?
By THOMAS HARTWELL
Let's talk about something very near and dear to my heart, or rather, my amygdalae -- the fear-conjuring portions of the human brain: A Trump nomination. Initially the thought of a Trump nomination gave me a sense of relief. "Well, if Trump is nominated, at least November will be triumphed by someone who, you know, isn't Trump." Now, though, I've begun to worry. Trump wasn't supposed to make it through the first couple months of a candidacy, and yet, here he is -- the GOP nominee. I've said "never" and been proven wrong in respect to Trump's campaign too many times to find any comfort in a statement that he could "never" win in November.
Not only has Trump now clinched the GOP nomination with more than the required 1,237 delegates bound to him, but several polls also show a narrowing margin between he and Hillary Clinton, a candidate who has only a slightly lower unfavorable rating than Mr. Trump. Amid an ongoing investigation into Clinton's use of a private email server during her time as Secretary of State and in a time of considerable public disdain and mistrust for the political establishment, Clinton's campaign seems to have more work cut out than previously thought.
Months ago, polls showed match ups in which Hillary Clinton won in landslide fashion over Donald Trump in November 2016, but those polls have recently been showing a spread within the margin of error and in some cases even with Trump edging Clinton out. "How could this possibly happen?!" I hear some of you out there shouting. Clinton supporters and Anti-Trumpsters alike neglected to take into account early on the effectiveness of Trump's personal attacks and empty promises on the masses. As expected, Trump has turned his attention solely to the presumptive Democratic nominee and begun a tirade based around a question of Clinton's character, coining a popular use for his campaign: "Crooked Hillary." There shouldn't be much surprise surrounding the narrowing of hypothetical match ups between the presumptive nominees. Polls conducted months before a general election and while other candidates remain in the race mean very little when taking into account all of the discoveries and events that could and would take place between then and an actual general election match up.
The best weapon that the Clinton campaign has left is a focus on her experience in politics and Trump's lack of experience. But even Clinton's experience in and around political office hasn't been able to save her from an unfavorable rating hovering anywhere between 50-60 percent -- she chose a bad time to be considered untrustworthy. Also, the Clinton campaign's earlier jabs at Trump's possible nomination -- "Really, folks? America's going to nominate Trump?" -- didn't resonate with anyone except the already Anti-Trump, and the "Trump's a joke" shtick can't, with any credibility, be used anymore.
Sanders is also causing the Clinton campaign some headache. While 66 percent of Sanders supporters say they would back Clinton if she were nominated, there have been reports of up to 20 percent of those "feeling the Bern" that would back Trump over Clinton. Clinton's supporters are also much more willing to support Bernie (88 percent) should he receive the nomination, prompting an even louder cry from many for a November Bernie bid (article here). But, sorry to all those out there feeling the Bern, the best possible thing that could happen to the Clinton campaign, and that could happen for the Never Trump movement, right now would be the suspension of Sanders' bid for the Democratic nomination paired with a Clinton endorsement from the Bern himself. Sanders should be careful not to alienate Clinton supporters if he really wants to defeat Trump and if he really is not going anywhere until the bitter end in July.
There have been calls for a third option, and I have to say, in a presidential campaign season that has already been filled with surprises, I think that hypothetical candidate could steal away quite a few votes, granted they distanced themselves enough from both candidates and still chose either a right or left lean.
Let's talk about something very near and dear to my heart, or rather, my amygdalae -- the fear-conjuring portions of the human brain: A Trump nomination. Initially the thought of a Trump nomination gave me a sense of relief. "Well, if Trump is nominated, at least November will be triumphed by someone who, you know, isn't Trump." Now, though, I've begun to worry. Trump wasn't supposed to make it through the first couple months of a candidacy, and yet, here he is -- the GOP nominee. I've said "never" and been proven wrong in respect to Trump's campaign too many times to find any comfort in a statement that he could "never" win in November.
Not only has Trump now clinched the GOP nomination with more than the required 1,237 delegates bound to him, but several polls also show a narrowing margin between he and Hillary Clinton, a candidate who has only a slightly lower unfavorable rating than Mr. Trump. Amid an ongoing investigation into Clinton's use of a private email server during her time as Secretary of State and in a time of considerable public disdain and mistrust for the political establishment, Clinton's campaign seems to have more work cut out than previously thought.
Months ago, polls showed match ups in which Hillary Clinton won in landslide fashion over Donald Trump in November 2016, but those polls have recently been showing a spread within the margin of error and in some cases even with Trump edging Clinton out. "How could this possibly happen?!" I hear some of you out there shouting. Clinton supporters and Anti-Trumpsters alike neglected to take into account early on the effectiveness of Trump's personal attacks and empty promises on the masses. As expected, Trump has turned his attention solely to the presumptive Democratic nominee and begun a tirade based around a question of Clinton's character, coining a popular use for his campaign: "Crooked Hillary." There shouldn't be much surprise surrounding the narrowing of hypothetical match ups between the presumptive nominees. Polls conducted months before a general election and while other candidates remain in the race mean very little when taking into account all of the discoveries and events that could and would take place between then and an actual general election match up.
The best weapon that the Clinton campaign has left is a focus on her experience in politics and Trump's lack of experience. But even Clinton's experience in and around political office hasn't been able to save her from an unfavorable rating hovering anywhere between 50-60 percent -- she chose a bad time to be considered untrustworthy. Also, the Clinton campaign's earlier jabs at Trump's possible nomination -- "Really, folks? America's going to nominate Trump?" -- didn't resonate with anyone except the already Anti-Trump, and the "Trump's a joke" shtick can't, with any credibility, be used anymore.
Sanders is also causing the Clinton campaign some headache. While 66 percent of Sanders supporters say they would back Clinton if she were nominated, there have been reports of up to 20 percent of those "feeling the Bern" that would back Trump over Clinton. Clinton's supporters are also much more willing to support Bernie (88 percent) should he receive the nomination, prompting an even louder cry from many for a November Bernie bid (article here). But, sorry to all those out there feeling the Bern, the best possible thing that could happen to the Clinton campaign, and that could happen for the Never Trump movement, right now would be the suspension of Sanders' bid for the Democratic nomination paired with a Clinton endorsement from the Bern himself. Sanders should be careful not to alienate Clinton supporters if he really wants to defeat Trump and if he really is not going anywhere until the bitter end in July.
There have been calls for a third option, and I have to say, in a presidential campaign season that has already been filled with surprises, I think that hypothetical candidate could steal away quite a few votes, granted they distanced themselves enough from both candidates and still chose either a right or left lean.
Thursday, April 14, 2016
Confirmation bias in the media: Show me, tell me
By THOMAS HARTWELL
We, as humans, believe that we are inherently correct and seek out information that agrees with our thinking. How does this apply to our daily thinking or our consumption of products, services, and news?
Confirmation bias, or the interpreting of evidence or information in regards to existing beliefs, has been addressed often in the discussion of the presentation of news. Most believe that there should be no biases in news reporting, and journalists are taught to stay completely objective in the presentation of hard news. While, in a perfect world, consumers of news could watch/read news presented completely objectively and make educated decisions based on what they read, we do not live in a perfect world. News organizations have to incorporate what sells into the presentation of their stories. There is also a consideration of gatekeepers who run the media organizations. While the goal should always be objective reporting, people have a tendency to have strong opinions on political issues, which many times manifest themselves in subtle biases in reporting.
When we explore confirmation bias in the larger media outlets, we often encounter a widely-accepted thought pattern: "CNN and MSNBC are liberal, Fox is conservative." While this is now considered the norm, the media outlets themselves would never come out and admit to it. The media outlets, therefore, must disguise their biases as "just another way of reporting."
Let's look at Fox and MSNBC's reporting of the same story. A racially insensitive joke was told at a charity dinner recently, and both outlets wrote a story on it. Keeping in mind that Fox is considered conservative and MSNBC liberal, there is a subtle difference in the reporting in a couple ways:
1. The headlines: In Fox's case, the headline reads that both Mayor De Blasio and Hillary Clinton take part in the joke and draw criticism. If we consider Fox's possible confirmation bias, it would make sense that they would want to frame Hillary in this way. Whereas, in MSNBC's case, only De Blasio takes part in the joke, and even then it's presented as "coming at a bad time" rather than being "racially-tinged."
2. The visuals: Fox shows Clinton and De Blasio laughing and seemingly celebrating with the headline "racially-tinged joke" hovering above. It seems to be framed as the two enjoying the insensitive comment. MSNBC instead shows Clinton off to the side looking on as the joke is made. This way, she seems to not take part in the joke making. Clinton also is even standing next to the African-American gentleman, further separating herself from the insensitivity.
Images, as we've already seen, can speak a thousand words in reporting, and often do. The images we see can impact our impression of the candidate depicted. For these examples, I'll choose a picture of Ted Cruz from CNN and one from Fox.
In these cases, the presentation of Ted Cruz is considered in the photos chosen to be published on the sites. CNN's picture choice is less than flattering, while Fox's looks like a campaign flier.
We, as humans, believe that we are inherently correct and seek out information that agrees with our thinking. How does this apply to our daily thinking or our consumption of products, services, and news?
Confirmation bias, or the interpreting of evidence or information in regards to existing beliefs, has been addressed often in the discussion of the presentation of news. Most believe that there should be no biases in news reporting, and journalists are taught to stay completely objective in the presentation of hard news. While, in a perfect world, consumers of news could watch/read news presented completely objectively and make educated decisions based on what they read, we do not live in a perfect world. News organizations have to incorporate what sells into the presentation of their stories. There is also a consideration of gatekeepers who run the media organizations. While the goal should always be objective reporting, people have a tendency to have strong opinions on political issues, which many times manifest themselves in subtle biases in reporting.
When we explore confirmation bias in the larger media outlets, we often encounter a widely-accepted thought pattern: "CNN and MSNBC are liberal, Fox is conservative." While this is now considered the norm, the media outlets themselves would never come out and admit to it. The media outlets, therefore, must disguise their biases as "just another way of reporting."
Let's look at Fox and MSNBC's reporting of the same story. A racially insensitive joke was told at a charity dinner recently, and both outlets wrote a story on it. Keeping in mind that Fox is considered conservative and MSNBC liberal, there is a subtle difference in the reporting in a couple ways:
![]() |
| Image and story from foxnews.com |
![]() |
| Image and story from msnbc.com |
2. The visuals: Fox shows Clinton and De Blasio laughing and seemingly celebrating with the headline "racially-tinged joke" hovering above. It seems to be framed as the two enjoying the insensitive comment. MSNBC instead shows Clinton off to the side looking on as the joke is made. This way, she seems to not take part in the joke making. Clinton also is even standing next to the African-American gentleman, further separating herself from the insensitivity.
Images, as we've already seen, can speak a thousand words in reporting, and often do. The images we see can impact our impression of the candidate depicted. For these examples, I'll choose a picture of Ted Cruz from CNN and one from Fox.
| Image from cnn.com |
| Image from foxnews.com |
While minds won't necessarily be changed by only images or word choice, the presentation of information or images can alter the way that people think about a subject. Objective news reporting and an educated public would be preferable to what is widely accepted as a biased news environment, but in order to inform the public, the public must want to be informed. If it takes subtle biases (even no-so-subtle ones) to inform them, then so be it -- I'll take the news with a grain of salt.
Labels:
2016 campaign,
bias,
Clinton,
cnn,
confirmation bias,
Cruz,
decision 2016,
fox,
Hillary Clinton,
media bias,
msnbc,
presidential campaign,
Ted Cruz,
THartwell Journalism,
Thomas Hartwell
Friday, March 11, 2016
Republican party aims to trump Trump as candidate furthers his delegate lead
By THOMAS HARTWELL
The 2016 presidential campaign has
been one that has, in many ways, strayed from the normal workings of U.S.
elections, with the season’s rhetoric centered around the anger and distrust of
a “corrupt Washington.” While both sides have seen revolutionary political strategies
and several broken ballot records, the Republican party’s election has
undeniably been the more colorful of the two, and Donald Trump has captured
voters’ attention. The Republican race to the general election is narrowing, and
the Trump campaign seems to be rallying the needed public support to face the
Democrats in November.
“The Trump phenomenon – no one saw
this coming. No one really understands why it’s happening – what’s going on –
but I’ve got some ideas,” said political expert Kerwin Swint.
Swint is an author, speaker and
professor of political science at Kennesaw State University. He has run
campaigns, written books and his work has appeared in several national and
international media outlets. Swint said that the “Trump phenomenon” as well as
this campaign season’s obviously splintered GOP is something that has been in
the cards for a while and has the potential to have lasting effects.
“What’s going on in the Republican party is a real
revolution,” said Swint. “It is serious, it is dramatic, it is significant and
it’s going to have long-term consequences.”
While there are plenty of voters out there who have
voiced their discontent with Trump, more surprisingly, said Swint, is the
amount of resistance Trump is receiving from the, so-called, establishment
Republicans. The establishment fears that a Trump nomination means a Clinton
victory, but it goes beyond that.
“The other part of their thinking … is, ‘Good Lord, he
might win,’ which might be worse,” said Swint. “President Trump would pay no
attention or very little attention to the establishment.”
Swint also said that a number of Republicans would
rather see Clinton win the general election than Trump – a party line-crossing
that has not been seen in decades.
Trump has appealed, most abundantly, to white,
blue-collar workers who are tired of Washington and who are willing to cross
party lines to vote an “outsider” into the Oval Office. His ability to pick up
Independent votes has given him an edge in the delegate count, said Swint, but
the damage that he and others have been doing to the GOP this season has forced
some voters to display their unhappiness in other ways.
Zac Carr, a 25-year-old Cobb County voter said his primary
vote was cast as a symbol of his own unhappiness with the candidates this
campaign season.
“I
voted for Rand Paul despite the fact that he is no longer running,” said Carr. “I
asked for a non-partisan ballet because I, like
George Washington, believe that the two-party system only polarizes our
country. I wanted to do my part by showing that I believe non-partisan is
preferred over Republican or Democrat.”
Carr said that the
“nastiness” in the Republican race forced his hand and initiated his
Independent vote.
Lott Middlemas, a
Florida voter and international relations and Chinese double major at the
University of South Carolina, agreed that the GOP race has been ugly, but said
that its dirty tactics might be good for the number of voters in a general
election.
“I think that voter turnout on both sides will increase
noticeably for both parties as a result of the inflammatory politics of the
Republican party during this election cycle,” said Middlemas. “The Republicans
have been talking for years about expanding their base of support by appealing
to minorities, but I don't think they'll see that as being necessary anymore
since they've managed to draw out many more white voters than usual without
having to soften their stances on economic and social issues that are often
important to minority voters.”
The Democrats, said Middlemas, will turnout in larger
numbers simply because of their fear of a Trump presidency and Clinton, he
said, will beat Trump handily.
Not so fast, says
Swint. A Clinton win isn’t such a sure-fire thing in a head-to-head.
“There
are people assuming that Trump wouldn’t have a chance in a general election
against Hillary Clinton. I’m not necessarily in agreement with that,” he said.
“One of the strengths of Trump is that he’s put together a pretty broad
coalition … It’s certainly not a slam dunk [for Clinton].”
It is his ability to appeal to groups of varying
demographics and political opinion that potentially makes Trump dangerous, said
Swint.
Yet another scenario
in the Republican race is a nomination by a convention. Trump leads by about
100 delegates with 460, but he does have to get through a still very present
Ted Cruz, and some wonder if the other Republican candidates may be able to
pull enough delegates away from Trump to prevent his receiving a majority
(1,237 delegates) and force the party to the convention. In this scenario, said
Swint, the Republican leadership runs the risk, should they nominate someone
other than Trump, of losing grip on their party.
“I think if they do take it away from [Trump] at the
convention, I think he absolutely will run independent,” said Swint. “And I think
at that point, he would be real interested in just wrecking the party for the
Republicans.”
A non-Trump convention
nominee would not only anger Republican voters, said Swint, but it would also
cause “wheeling and dealing” between presidential candidates, state governments
and others – precisely the kind of Washington antics voters are tired of.
According to
Middlemas, though, Republican voters don’t need to worry about a convention.
“Super Tuesday cemented Donald Trump's supremacy in this
race,” he said. “Sen. Cruz might be able to win a few more states, but Trump
will certainly have a majority of delegates by the time the Republican national
convention rolls around.”
Whether or not Trump has solidified
his nomination remains to be seen, but polls with only Trump and Clinton’s name
on them have begun to show up. Current CNN polls
show either Democrat defeating Trump in November, but November is still miles
down the road, said Swint.
“The
general election [polls] right now are meaningless,” said Swint. “The
election’s months and months away. We’re going to have coalitions, we’re going
to have world events, we’re going to have economic developments that are going
to affect that.”
All
we can do now, said Swint, is wait and watch.
Wednesday, March 9, 2016
Twitter Tirades, Kasich Kindness and Revolution Rhetoric: The State of the Race 2016
The 2016 presidential campaign has been underway for months, and various candidates have utilized various communication outlets and tactics to ensure voters that they are the best candidate for office. There are three themes that, over the entirety of the 2016 campaign season, have stuck out to me. These three themes and the candidates behind them have impressed me (whether or not I care to endorse them).
#1 Trump Twitter Tirades
![]() |
| From Donald Trump Twitter |
![]() |
| From Donald Trump Twitter |
Potential downfall: In a general election against Hillary, how will Trump's Twitter foot stamping and name calling fair against Hillary's ability to get into the nitty-gritty on the issues?
#2 The Revolution Rhetoric: Bernie Sanders
How many time have we heard Bernie Sanders say the words "political revolution" and "top one percent" in his speeches, at debates, in interviews, and at rallies? While some see Sanders' focus on the issue he is most passionate about -- corporate greed, fixing income inequality, changing a corrupt campaign finance system, etc. -- as a weakness, calling him a one-issue candidate, his supporters see it as more of a brand. Sanders' brand through his rhetoric, whether critics will admit it or not, have propelled him to where he is now. Sanders, a self-proclaimed Democratic Socialist was expected to be laughed out of this primary election (much like another presidential candidate this season). Through a radical, revolutionary brand in his rhetoric, and the help of many, many Millennials in voting and spreading the word, Sanders has rocketed to several neck-and-neck state primaries with Hillary Clinton. His rhetorical brand of a government "truly for the people" has connected with many voters' anger with Washington and corporate America's greed (again, does this remind you of another candidate?). It cannot be denied that Bernie's brand is catching wind either -- even Hillary Clinton began borrowing some of his lines recently. Might Hillary be considering Bernie's brand, and might she be considering a Bernie VP to better her own stance in the eyes of Democratic Independents? We'll have to see.
Potential downfall: While his rhetoric is exciting, many see him as a one-issue candidate and his young voter following, while excited about him, doesn't turn out to polls in quite the number his campaign might hope.
#3 Kasich's Kindness
John Kasich has time and time again refused to "go negative" against other presidential candidates. Many feel that it is this choice that has doomed Kasich's campaign to fail from the beginning, but I'm not so sure. Kasich has taken the opposite approach of a Trump or, most recently, a Rubio this campaign season, attempting to show through his actions, not fighting words, that he is the candidate that can "get stuff done." As the race progressed, it became more and more obvious that Kasich wasn't a front-runner, and, while he survived into the top four, he wasn't destined to be the next president, so why remain gentle, kind, patient Kasich? Kasich, too, is promoting a brand, but not with rhetoric; his is with non-verbal cues, actions, and choices. Kasich maintains a brand, still, of selling his product instead of commenting on why the others' are inferior. There have been inklings, however, that Kasich's brand is strategic. If Kasich does not take opportunities to attack candidates, even if the opportunity is handed to him, he remains a friend and is has been suggested that this may be his ploy for VP. The Ohio governor may be using his political communication skills as a sort of Jedi mind trick on voters, and instead, he may be focusing his energy on the front-runners' right-hand seat.
Potential downfalls: Kasich continues to pull delegates away from the front-runners and runs the risk of contributing to a Republican convention in which his VP dreams are slightly more cloudy.
Friday, March 4, 2016
Lessons along the campaign trail
By THOMAS HARTWELL
I am so incredibly excited to be in journalism, and my number one priority and my hope is that it shows while I'm on the job and in my finished product. As I've participated in gathering information and in reporting on the campaign trail, I have learned lessons, and sured-up others.
First lesson: the devil is in the details. I've learned this the hard way previously. The campaign events and news stories that I have covered have allowed me to build off of the mistakes that I've made. Accuracy is everything in journalism, and so is integrity -- accurate quotes and assurance of permission are paramount. During interviews, I write times of reference for good quotes, passionate answers, jokes, etc. on my recordings. I also have interviewees write their names and contact information on a notepad as well as record those elements on tape. For absolute assurance of friendly relations and a happy interviewee, I have made a habit of emailing soon after the interview thanking them and requesting a response which, in writing, displays my ability to use their photos, names etc. in my stories or blog posts (I have an archive full).
Whether or not my colleagues become competition in the future doesn't matter -- we'll all be working toward a commons goal: reliable, accurate and dependable reporting that, among other things, keeps the general public informed and the elites accountable. Final lesson: don't take your colleagues for granted -- your competition might just turn out to be your saving grace in the end.
I am so incredibly excited to be in journalism, and my number one priority and my hope is that it shows while I'm on the job and in my finished product. As I've participated in gathering information and in reporting on the campaign trail, I have learned lessons, and sured-up others.
| Bernie Sanders speaks at campaign rally at Morehouse College in Atlanta, Tuesday, February 16. Photo by Thomas Hartwell |
| A man who preferred to be called "St. Nick" and his friend, who preferred anonymity at the Morehouse College Bernie Sanders event, Tuesday, February 16. Photo by Thomas Hartwell |
On that same note, a lesson that I've learned throughout my life, but that has been reinforced in work: don't take people and your interactions with them for granted. I love nothing more than meeting new people, asking them about the things they love or hot-button issues and participating in a sort of dialogue. Journalism allows for a relationship to develop very quickly and last between interviewer and interviewee -- it also provides opportunities for relationships to go South quickly, but we'll put that to the side for now. These relationships with both the people interviewed and people you simply run into have the potential to impact you in the moment and benefit you down the road.
| "Look like you know what you're doing and nobody asks any questions." This is a lesson that I learned early and that I apply often. Check out the story. It is becoming increasingly clear to me how exciting my career will be and how small the world of journalism really is. I have had an absolute blast on the trail with my colleagues, and I know that the excitement of, "You got that interview?" and "There's a great angle for a shot over there" will continue and manifest itself in important professional relationships in coming months and years. |
| Gabriel Ramos stands atop the media platform at the Morehouse College Bernie Sanders event, Tuesday, February 16. Photo by Thomas Hartwell |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



