So, I guess in my world, tomorrow is practically a national holiday. Here are a few thoughts on this Election Eve. In my discussion sections this week, we are going to talk about the election. For my students, this is their first and probably only election experience occurring while they're in college. For me, it's my third. So, I was thinking that this presidential election would be the first one that I would experience without the cold weather and snow. I just checked the weather forecast, and it turns out that I would be able to say the same thing if I were in Minnesota right now. It's supposed to be 65 degrees in Minneapolis and Irvine tomorrow. Weird.
My students were really impressive today, and I expect the remaining two sections will be too. My goal was to get my students to think critically and formulate their own opinions instead of simply memorizing and regurgitating material. We talked about the electoral college and how our vote doesn't really matter since California always goes blue. They talked about the alternatives to the electoral college and the tradeoffs. They also discussed how it didn't seem fair that candidates spend all of their time campaigning in the swing states and ignoring our state.
Then we moved on and talked about young people and voting. Statistics tell us that young people just don't show up to the polls and vote, leaving this demographic underrepresented. In 2004, we thought that that was going to be the election in which more young people would turn up at the polls. We thought the same thing in the 2008 primaries, and we think the same thing about tomorrow. However, voter turnout among the young is not substantially increasing. One of my students pointed out that turnout is low among all demographics, so maybe people should just lighten up among the alleged apathy among the young. Good point. They may not be as disengaged as we may think.
Finally, we moved on to judicial appointments and whether or not the Supreme Court can produce social change. I'm TAing an Intro to Law class, so I had to guide the discussion to this topic. We discussed the capacity of the Supreme Court to make change and whether or not it was its role to do so. Particularly, we discussed Proposition 8 and whether it was undemocratic for the state Supreme Court to legalize same-sex marriage. We talked about whether or not a ballot proposition is more appropriate and in line with our democratic ideals. In the end, they decided that sometimes the Supreme Court needs to step in and act as a referee when other branches of government or when the people infringe upon the rights of a minority. All in all, it was a great section, and I'm excited for the next 2.
I went to an Election Panel Discussion today hosted by the department. Five of our professors gave a quick five minute presentation on a topic relevant to the election. CK discussed racial politics. Obama has been accused of being Muslim, and he is accused of having associations with an alleged "terrorist". Opponents sometimes use his middle name, Hussein, in attempts to associate him with Saddam Hussein. Anyway, CK talked about how Arab, Muslim, and terrorist have somehow all become synonymous with each other. And, Arabs and Muslims have been constructed in a way that places them at the bottom of the racial hierarchy, perhaps replacing blacks.
BG talked about voting behavior in the presidential elections. The Midwest is confused and fluctuates, the Pacific West is getting more liberal, and the Mountain West is becoming more conservative. New England is getting more liberal, and I forgot what he said about the South. All right, what else? LD talked about how both campaigns have failed to reach out to Latinos. However, most live in non battleground states: California, Texas, New York, and Illinois. That might explain the lack of attention; candidates pay more attention to the swing states. Anyway, I was just surprised that Illinois had such a large Latino population.
Finally, CU talked about political participation. Voter registration is up in the contested states, and we're still waiting for young people to surprise us all and show up at the polls in substantial numbers. Turnout among young people just isn't going up, despite what the media would have us believe. CU also told us that the VP candidate usually doesn't make a difference in the presidential race. Usually, the VP choice doesn't help or hinder the presidential candidate's chance of winning. But, it's different now, and now the VP choice matters in this race. Stay tuned.
My students were really impressive today, and I expect the remaining two sections will be too. My goal was to get my students to think critically and formulate their own opinions instead of simply memorizing and regurgitating material. We talked about the electoral college and how our vote doesn't really matter since California always goes blue. They talked about the alternatives to the electoral college and the tradeoffs. They also discussed how it didn't seem fair that candidates spend all of their time campaigning in the swing states and ignoring our state.
Then we moved on and talked about young people and voting. Statistics tell us that young people just don't show up to the polls and vote, leaving this demographic underrepresented. In 2004, we thought that that was going to be the election in which more young people would turn up at the polls. We thought the same thing in the 2008 primaries, and we think the same thing about tomorrow. However, voter turnout among the young is not substantially increasing. One of my students pointed out that turnout is low among all demographics, so maybe people should just lighten up among the alleged apathy among the young. Good point. They may not be as disengaged as we may think.
Finally, we moved on to judicial appointments and whether or not the Supreme Court can produce social change. I'm TAing an Intro to Law class, so I had to guide the discussion to this topic. We discussed the capacity of the Supreme Court to make change and whether or not it was its role to do so. Particularly, we discussed Proposition 8 and whether it was undemocratic for the state Supreme Court to legalize same-sex marriage. We talked about whether or not a ballot proposition is more appropriate and in line with our democratic ideals. In the end, they decided that sometimes the Supreme Court needs to step in and act as a referee when other branches of government or when the people infringe upon the rights of a minority. All in all, it was a great section, and I'm excited for the next 2.
I went to an Election Panel Discussion today hosted by the department. Five of our professors gave a quick five minute presentation on a topic relevant to the election. CK discussed racial politics. Obama has been accused of being Muslim, and he is accused of having associations with an alleged "terrorist". Opponents sometimes use his middle name, Hussein, in attempts to associate him with Saddam Hussein. Anyway, CK talked about how Arab, Muslim, and terrorist have somehow all become synonymous with each other. And, Arabs and Muslims have been constructed in a way that places them at the bottom of the racial hierarchy, perhaps replacing blacks.
BG talked about voting behavior in the presidential elections. The Midwest is confused and fluctuates, the Pacific West is getting more liberal, and the Mountain West is becoming more conservative. New England is getting more liberal, and I forgot what he said about the South. All right, what else? LD talked about how both campaigns have failed to reach out to Latinos. However, most live in non battleground states: California, Texas, New York, and Illinois. That might explain the lack of attention; candidates pay more attention to the swing states. Anyway, I was just surprised that Illinois had such a large Latino population.
Finally, CU talked about political participation. Voter registration is up in the contested states, and we're still waiting for young people to surprise us all and show up at the polls in substantial numbers. Turnout among young people just isn't going up, despite what the media would have us believe. CU also told us that the VP candidate usually doesn't make a difference in the presidential race. Usually, the VP choice doesn't help or hinder the presidential candidate's chance of winning. But, it's different now, and now the VP choice matters in this race. Stay tuned.
No comments:
Post a Comment