The Campaign Decoder
A Weekly Online Magazine to Understand the 2016 US Presidential Elections
Made by 1st Year Students in the English Department at Rouen University
with a little help from Prof. Peter Marquis.
The Iowa Issue
#2. Feb. 3, 2016
print version
Contents
- The News This Past Week: "The Surprise of Iowa: Cruz in; Trump Out; Clinton Challenged."
- What to Look At in the Coming Weeks: "New Hampshire: a Major Turn?"
- Background Check: "#2. Why Don't Americans Vote?"
- Media Watch: "Media Trumpalisation"
- Cartoon of the Week.
- Free Speech.
The editors-in-chief for this issue were Brice Poder and Arthur Clarke.
Publisher's note: all the articles were researched, written and proofread by students. It is their original work. Plagiarism check was done using Urkund. Some pieces of information were added by the publisher. For any questions or comments, write us here.
The News This Past Week
The Surprise of Iowa: Cruz In; Trump Out; Clinton Challenged.
By Clémence Catelle, Thibaut Tesson and Capucine Hatrel
Results came out this Monday night and they are surprising. First of all the tie between H. Clinton and B. Sanders for the democrats: 49,9% for Clinton against 49,5% for Sanders. On the Republicans’ side the unexpected defeat of D. Trump with 24% against 28% for T. Cruz which makes him the uncanny winner for the Republican party in Iowa, followed closely by M. Rubio with 23%, making them possible winners in other states, and last for the party, B. Carson with 9%.
Looking at the polls before the votes, on the Democrats’ side Clinton was expected to hit 45% and Sanders only 42%. Final results can be explained by the media campaign especially on social networks, Sanders attracting more young people with his program regarding tuition free college admissions. Hillary’s results come more from her experience in the political field.
On the Republicans’ side, Trump was at the top of the rankings with 28% and Cruz with 23%. The final results can be explained by Ted Cruz’s huge movement of support from the evangelists and Rubio’s Hispanic origins which grants him the Mexicans and minorities’ approval. Trump’s fall can be explained by his radicalism, which caused people to reconsider their votes towards him.
We have yet to see what will happen next in the following weeks, starting Tuesday, February 9th, in New Hampshire.
Sources : Washington Post #1, #2 ; CNN; Politico.
By Clémence Catelle, Thibaut Tesson and Capucine Hatrel
Results came out this Monday night and they are surprising. First of all the tie between H. Clinton and B. Sanders for the democrats: 49,9% for Clinton against 49,5% for Sanders. On the Republicans’ side the unexpected defeat of D. Trump with 24% against 28% for T. Cruz which makes him the uncanny winner for the Republican party in Iowa, followed closely by M. Rubio with 23%, making them possible winners in other states, and last for the party, B. Carson with 9%.
Looking at the polls before the votes, on the Democrats’ side Clinton was expected to hit 45% and Sanders only 42%. Final results can be explained by the media campaign especially on social networks, Sanders attracting more young people with his program regarding tuition free college admissions. Hillary’s results come more from her experience in the political field.
On the Republicans’ side, Trump was at the top of the rankings with 28% and Cruz with 23%. The final results can be explained by Ted Cruz’s huge movement of support from the evangelists and Rubio’s Hispanic origins which grants him the Mexicans and minorities’ approval. Trump’s fall can be explained by his radicalism, which caused people to reconsider their votes towards him.
We have yet to see what will happen next in the following weeks, starting Tuesday, February 9th, in New Hampshire.
Sources : Washington Post #1, #2 ; CNN; Politico.
What to Look At in the Coming Weeks
New Hampshire: a Major Turn?
By Daphné Garat, Anaëlle Geoffrin and Choi H. Chloe
Following the Iowa caucus, the New Hampshire primary will be held on Tuesday, February 9, 2016. Contrary to the caucus, which is planned by political parties, a primary is organized by the state's board of elections. It measures the number of votes each candidate receives directly, rather than through precinct delegates.
As the first in a series of nationwide party primary elections, it could represent a major turn in the 2016 race. Indeed it receives about as much media attention as all other state contests combined, and it's about the ideas more than about the organization.
Therefore, the question everyone has in mind is of course: who are currently the announced winners? Who's leading in the polls? According to RealClearPolitics, an aggregator of polls, Trump is at 34%, Cruz at 11,5% and Kasich, Bush and Rubio around 10%. For the Democrats, Sanders is peaking at 55% and Clinton at 37%.
What is surprising to notice is that even though the state of New Hampshire is known as a rather moderate one, Donald Trump still seems to be leading. If he ever wins, his candidacy will be legitimized. However, the Iowa caucuses may have changed voters' minds.
Sources:
By Daphné Garat, Anaëlle Geoffrin and Choi H. Chloe
Following the Iowa caucus, the New Hampshire primary will be held on Tuesday, February 9, 2016. Contrary to the caucus, which is planned by political parties, a primary is organized by the state's board of elections. It measures the number of votes each candidate receives directly, rather than through precinct delegates.
As the first in a series of nationwide party primary elections, it could represent a major turn in the 2016 race. Indeed it receives about as much media attention as all other state contests combined, and it's about the ideas more than about the organization.
Therefore, the question everyone has in mind is of course: who are currently the announced winners? Who's leading in the polls? According to RealClearPolitics, an aggregator of polls, Trump is at 34%, Cruz at 11,5% and Kasich, Bush and Rubio around 10%. For the Democrats, Sanders is peaking at 55% and Clinton at 37%.
What is surprising to notice is that even though the state of New Hampshire is known as a rather moderate one, Donald Trump still seems to be leading. If he ever wins, his candidacy will be legitimized. However, the Iowa caucuses may have changed voters' minds.
Sources:
- Richard M. Perloff, Political Communication: Politics, Press, and Public in America (1998) p. 294.
- www.thewashingtonpost.com
- www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com
Background Check
#2. Why Don't Americans Vote?
by Laurette Gavois, Margaux Fargeon and Camille Grard
It is a well-known fact that many Americans usually do not vote. The turnout for the presidential elections was under 50% from 1968 to 2004. Since then, it's been climbing to around 60%; By comparison, it is around 80% in France. With help of zencollegelife, we summarized for you the 7 main reasons why they don't vote.
1. They think their vote will not count
The first reason is a common excuse. Many Americans believe that it is the Electoral College who chooses the President, not the voters. But in reality, popular vote determines in each state the Electoral College, thus every vote counts.
2. They are too busy
Voting often presents scheduling challenges as it usually takes place on a Tuesday, hence Americans have to manage with their works, families and other things in order to vote.
3. Registration requirements
Voting registration sometimes can be confusing, especially for citizens who moved from one state to another.
4. Apathy
Americans have a reputation for being apathetic to politics and many do not like the voting progress. But if they do not voice their opinion by voting, they just will not express themselves.
5. Lines are too long
Lines can seem to be a waste of time and energy. However, with new technologies it is easier and more efficient, so voters can get in and out without waiting long hours.
6. They don't like the candidates
Many people distrust politicians ; but sometimes they do not really know them and they distrust them without having their own opinion. Sometimes one has to vote for the candidate one dislikes the least
7. Can't get to the polls
Sometimes it can be hard to get to the polls, especially for the sick or disabled, but also for the ones who are on vacations or business travel. Nowadays, advocacy groups are making it easier. Moreover, absentee voting allows Americans who are out of the country to cast their vote remotely.
Focus: Voters' Participation by Social Groups
Voter turnout at elections in the United States has changed a lot since 1828. During the first three elections, the highest participation rate was only about 57% and it has increased until about 82% in 1876. After this year, the rate has dropped and since 1912, voters turnout does not exceed 62%.
The turnout varies according to the sex, the age and the ethnicity of the voters. From 1984 to 2004, the population who voted more was the non-hispanic whites. After 2004, it has changed : the non-hispanic blacks are the most important voters. From 18 to 74 years, the participation rate of women is higher than the men’s one. From the age of 75 years and over, women vote less and men's participation is superior.
Sources:
1. They think their vote will not count
The first reason is a common excuse. Many Americans believe that it is the Electoral College who chooses the President, not the voters. But in reality, popular vote determines in each state the Electoral College, thus every vote counts.
2. They are too busy
Voting often presents scheduling challenges as it usually takes place on a Tuesday, hence Americans have to manage with their works, families and other things in order to vote.
3. Registration requirements
Voting registration sometimes can be confusing, especially for citizens who moved from one state to another.
4. Apathy
Americans have a reputation for being apathetic to politics and many do not like the voting progress. But if they do not voice their opinion by voting, they just will not express themselves.
5. Lines are too long
Lines can seem to be a waste of time and energy. However, with new technologies it is easier and more efficient, so voters can get in and out without waiting long hours.
6. They don't like the candidates
Many people distrust politicians ; but sometimes they do not really know them and they distrust them without having their own opinion. Sometimes one has to vote for the candidate one dislikes the least
7. Can't get to the polls
Sometimes it can be hard to get to the polls, especially for the sick or disabled, but also for the ones who are on vacations or business travel. Nowadays, advocacy groups are making it easier. Moreover, absentee voting allows Americans who are out of the country to cast their vote remotely.
Focus: Voters' Participation by Social Groups
Voter turnout at elections in the United States has changed a lot since 1828. During the first three elections, the highest participation rate was only about 57% and it has increased until about 82% in 1876. After this year, the rate has dropped and since 1912, voters turnout does not exceed 62%.
The turnout varies according to the sex, the age and the ethnicity of the voters. From 1984 to 2004, the population who voted more was the non-hispanic whites. After 2004, it has changed : the non-hispanic blacks are the most important voters. From 18 to 74 years, the participation rate of women is higher than the men’s one. From the age of 75 years and over, women vote less and men's participation is superior.
Sources:
Media Watch: How Did the Media Cover the Campaign This Week?
Media Trumpalization
By Logan Em, Kostadin Petkov and Maud Salbat.
Here they are, the Iowa results! And guess what, Donald Trump is only second in the Republican polls with 24,31%, that is a little bit over 3% behind Ted Cruz. Trump was sure Iowa's caucuses were already wrapped and won, but he should have thought twice before skipping last Thursday’s debate.
Trump's over-representation on the media world reached quite a culminating point last week. As a matter of fact, it all started with Cruz challenging the famous businessman to a one-on-one debate. But the whole thing turned into a media battle between Trump criticizing Fox News' mediator Meghyn Kelly and Cruz asking for a “fair and policy-centered debate”. On Twitter, Trump justified his decision not to attend the debate and made a short video on Instagram. The right-wing TV channel stood behind its journalist. Maybe the media should have accorded less importance before the very first caucuses.
Moreover, instead of the debate, the billionaire managed to take away some of Fox News' viewers for his own show on a rival channel to gather funds for veterans. As CNN analysys claim, this was a good revenge on the TV channel which took advantage of the fact that Cruz needed a last chance after his losses in the previous debates.
By Logan Em, Kostadin Petkov and Maud Salbat.
Here they are, the Iowa results! And guess what, Donald Trump is only second in the Republican polls with 24,31%, that is a little bit over 3% behind Ted Cruz. Trump was sure Iowa's caucuses were already wrapped and won, but he should have thought twice before skipping last Thursday’s debate.
Trump's over-representation on the media world reached quite a culminating point last week. As a matter of fact, it all started with Cruz challenging the famous businessman to a one-on-one debate. But the whole thing turned into a media battle between Trump criticizing Fox News' mediator Meghyn Kelly and Cruz asking for a “fair and policy-centered debate”. On Twitter, Trump justified his decision not to attend the debate and made a short video on Instagram. The right-wing TV channel stood behind its journalist. Maybe the media should have accorded less importance before the very first caucuses.
Moreover, instead of the debate, the billionaire managed to take away some of Fox News' viewers for his own show on a rival channel to gather funds for veterans. As CNN analysys claim, this was a good revenge on the TV channel which took advantage of the fact that Cruz needed a last chance after his losses in the previous debates.
Cartoon of the Week: Trump as Darth Vader
By Allan Dirninger, Emmanueline Pierri & Elijah Agasse
In this cartoon published on December 11, 2015 the Republican candidate Donald J. Trump is dressed as Darth Vader. Here the cartoonist wanted to celebrate the new Star Wars movie: The Force Awakens. Trump as Darth Vader is relevant because of his policy suggestion to block all Muslims immigrants into America. He seems to act as if he was an Emperor, like he was already the winner.
In this caricature there is the media (FOX and NBC) represented to announce Trump as the winner; they film him while he is killing everybody who is against him and he uses “the Force” to strangle someone, as Darth Vader would do. The quote “I honestly don’t care what any of you think.” means that the media can say whatever they want, Trump doesn’t care because people still support him and would vote for him.
We can associate this cartoon with one of his latest declaration from January, 23: “My people are so smart. And you know what else they say about my people? The polls — they say I have the most loyal people ... I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose any voters.”
Author: Bryant Arnold. Source : http://www.cartoonaday.com/donald-trump-as-darth-vader-cartoon/
In this caricature there is the media (FOX and NBC) represented to announce Trump as the winner; they film him while he is killing everybody who is against him and he uses “the Force” to strangle someone, as Darth Vader would do. The quote “I honestly don’t care what any of you think.” means that the media can say whatever they want, Trump doesn’t care because people still support him and would vote for him.
We can associate this cartoon with one of his latest declaration from January, 23: “My people are so smart. And you know what else they say about my people? The polls — they say I have the most loyal people ... I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose any voters.”
Author: Bryant Arnold. Source : http://www.cartoonaday.com/donald-trump-as-darth-vader-cartoon/
Free Speech
Here is your space for your column, editorial, rant, fiction, banter, endorsement, etc. Send suggestions to the publisher.
Cruz, the Reasonable Choice?
From the publisher
So the good people of Iowa have proven the world that Americans can be reasonable sometimes. Well, if you consider that Ted Cruz is a more reasonable candidate than Donald Trump. We beg to differ.
First, the Senator from Texas is known for holding arch-conservative views that are out of step with the times and with public opinion. For instance his repeated attacks on same-sex marriage clash with recent polls : 60 % of Americans think these unions should be considered valid by the law.
Second, his main funder is The Club for Growth, a 501(c)4 organization with an agenda to deregulate the economy, cut taxes and limit government intervention. He is also financially supported by Goldman Sachs - known for ushering in the 2008 Great Recession - and various fossil fuel companies (source). This does not bode well for any significant change in American politics. Corporations, often working against the general interest, will continue to run the show. On that topic, Dark Money, The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right, the new book by investigation journalist Jane Mayer, chronicles how "Charles and David Koch, the enormously rich proprietors of an oil company based in Kansas, decided that they would spend huge amounts of money to elect conservatives at all levels of American government" (New York Times book review).
Finally, his strong showing among so-called "evangelicals," is worrisome. Some of them represent a dangerous brand of Christian fundamentalism based on a literal reading of the Bible and a exclusive emphasis on the emotional experience of religion. It is no coincidence that Troy Newman, president of Operation Rescue, a Christian anti-abortion movement responsible for a series of murderous attacks on abortion doctors in the 1990s, recently endorsed Cruz. The Senator gladly accepted the endorsement, stating "Troy Newman has served as a voice for the unborn for over 25 years, and works tirelessly every day for the pro-life cause. We need leaders ... who will stand up for those who do not have a voice."
From the publisher
So the good people of Iowa have proven the world that Americans can be reasonable sometimes. Well, if you consider that Ted Cruz is a more reasonable candidate than Donald Trump. We beg to differ.
First, the Senator from Texas is known for holding arch-conservative views that are out of step with the times and with public opinion. For instance his repeated attacks on same-sex marriage clash with recent polls : 60 % of Americans think these unions should be considered valid by the law.
Second, his main funder is The Club for Growth, a 501(c)4 organization with an agenda to deregulate the economy, cut taxes and limit government intervention. He is also financially supported by Goldman Sachs - known for ushering in the 2008 Great Recession - and various fossil fuel companies (source). This does not bode well for any significant change in American politics. Corporations, often working against the general interest, will continue to run the show. On that topic, Dark Money, The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right, the new book by investigation journalist Jane Mayer, chronicles how "Charles and David Koch, the enormously rich proprietors of an oil company based in Kansas, decided that they would spend huge amounts of money to elect conservatives at all levels of American government" (New York Times book review).
Finally, his strong showing among so-called "evangelicals," is worrisome. Some of them represent a dangerous brand of Christian fundamentalism based on a literal reading of the Bible and a exclusive emphasis on the emotional experience of religion. It is no coincidence that Troy Newman, president of Operation Rescue, a Christian anti-abortion movement responsible for a series of murderous attacks on abortion doctors in the 1990s, recently endorsed Cruz. The Senator gladly accepted the endorsement, stating "Troy Newman has served as a voice for the unborn for over 25 years, and works tirelessly every day for the pro-life cause. We need leaders ... who will stand up for those who do not have a voice."
End of Issue #2. Thanks for reading. See you next Wednesday.