This is a student reaction paper about the 2016 presidential elections. This was written in March of 2016.
Reaction Paper 1
I decided to write this reaction paper on the election that is currently capturing public attention. I have had many different reactions to this election due to the fact that I find it to be somewhat of a joke. Politically the things that America is letting go on right now are embarrassing, and are also beginning to spark many different controversies.
In the presidential election, we have Donald Trump, Hilary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and a series of other candidates. These candidates are all fighting to become the President of the United States, but they are all lacking in some department of what I feel—or better yet, what America feels—a president should have when it comes to their demeanor and the way that they go about what they are doing to make America better then what it has been in the last 20 years.
The major reaction that I have towards this election is the fact that it has been a very clear case of racism and bigotry that has been tolerated. Starting off with Donald Trump, Trump has put people down in ways that I never thought would be imaginable for a presidential candidate. Saying things like, if elected he will build a wall so that, Mexicans can stay where they are and won’t cross the border. Even after saying something so wrong, he is currently leading in the polls. Thinking about this, I say I believe that the reason Donald is leading, is because he is saying all the things that some people want to say, but feel that it would be completely inappropriate, which it is.
Hilary Clinton is the first woman to ever run for presidency. She brings a lot to the Democratic Party that could be useful to America, but the reaction of the public is not so positive when it comes to a woman being in office. I feel that nobody really takes her seriously when it comes to actually stating the issues. People believe that she’s not really sure of what she wants to bring to the table when it comes to her becoming president.
One of the favorites of the election is Bernie Sanders. He is clearly one of the best candidates for the job. But, he has had some negatives about his campaigning. Bernie is an active member of the Black Lives Matter movement and trying to get free college education, but I think with him he speaks before he’s thought what he’s saying completely through. Yes, it is perfectly fine standing with the Black Lives Matter, I feel that you cannot be so pro black that you are anti-white or any other race. Becoming the president is a serious action, and you have to take in the account of all of the people who live in America, not just the black ones. Then, when it comes to the free college education, I feel that that is a great thought, but it’s not logical. Being the president takes logical thinking and thinking that taking millions of dollars away from colleges is going to be the solution to the lack of education that is prevalent in the states today, he is wrong. Because, even after free college, there will still be that hand full of people who don’t want to go to school.
All of the things that I have stated in this paper are how I am reacting to the presidential election that is going on this year. Although I did not go into extreme detail about all the candidates that are running, I feel that I brought a lot into play.
You have examined the three candidates that seem most likely to actually get into the White House next year.
You perceive that candidate Trump says terrible things, but many of the people who like him want to say those things, and they support him because he is giving voice to what they feel. Keep in mind that Mr. Trump says all sorts of things. Many of the things he says are outlandish, crude, stupid, ill-informed, and false. Many of the things he says are true, inspiring, accurate, clever, or honest. I suspect some of his followers are paying attention to the good stuff he says and ignoring the bad stuff. Also, some people like the good stuff and the bad stuff. Essentially, he is building emotional support with a narrative about how terrible political leadership has been, and how dishonest the press is, and I think many Americans will agree with those two points. It is easy enough to dismiss Trump based on the the odious and obnoxious things he says, and his seeming personality disorder, but
You perceive that people don’t take Hilary Clinton seriously. I wonder where you are getting that impression? Do you look at political polling? She seems to be the most likely person to become our next president. You report that people perceive her as being unsure about what she wants to accomplish when she gets to the White House. That is an interesting observation. Do you mean that she is mainly defining herself in opposition to the Republicans? That is, rather than talking about what she could accomplish, she is promising to continue what Obama has done, and defend us from Republicans?
You think Sanders does not think through what he is saying, and may speak without carefully considering his words. He seems pretty consistent from me. It seems to me he is saying essentially the same stuff he and other Democratic Socialists have been saying ever since the 1970s. As for taking money away from universities, I believe his policy idea is to have taxpayers give universities the money that normally would have been collected from students. The “free college” would be paid for by taxpayers rather than students and their families. Perhaps students and their families would still pay fees, or costs of housing and food and textbooks. Presumably there would be some sort of a policy for keeping Universities prevented from raising tuition to ridiculous amounts. By the way, the State of Illinois currently has policies that give “free education” to certain persons (especially veterans), but those free educations are not funded, meaning that, exactly as you imagine, the public universities must educate those students without any tuition revenue from either the taxpayers or the students.
Your reaction paper does not mention Jill Stein, who was on campus giving a speech earlier in March. She is a presidential candidate for the Green Party.
You perceive that candidate Trump says terrible things, but many of the people who like him want to say those things, and they support him because he is giving voice to what they feel. Keep in mind that Mr. Trump says all sorts of things. Many of the things he says are outlandish, crude, stupid, ill-informed, and false. Many of the things he says are true, inspiring, accurate, clever, or honest. I suspect some of his followers are paying attention to the good stuff he says and ignoring the bad stuff. Also, some people like the good stuff and the bad stuff. Essentially, he is building emotional support with a narrative about how terrible political leadership has been, and how dishonest the press is, and I think many Americans will agree with those two points. It is easy enough to dismiss Trump based on the the odious and obnoxious things he says, and his seeming personality disorder, but
You perceive that people don’t take Hilary Clinton seriously. I wonder where you are getting that impression? Do you look at political polling? She seems to be the most likely person to become our next president. You report that people perceive her as being unsure about what she wants to accomplish when she gets to the White House. That is an interesting observation. Do you mean that she is mainly defining herself in opposition to the Republicans? That is, rather than talking about what she could accomplish, she is promising to continue what Obama has done, and defend us from Republicans?
You think Sanders does not think through what he is saying, and may speak without carefully considering his words. He seems pretty consistent from me. It seems to me he is saying essentially the same stuff he and other Democratic Socialists have been saying ever since the 1970s. As for taking money away from universities, I believe his policy idea is to have taxpayers give universities the money that normally would have been collected from students. The “free college” would be paid for by taxpayers rather than students and their families. Perhaps students and their families would still pay fees, or costs of housing and food and textbooks. Presumably there would be some sort of a policy for keeping Universities prevented from raising tuition to ridiculous amounts. By the way, the State of Illinois currently has policies that give “free education” to certain persons (especially veterans), but those free educations are not funded, meaning that, exactly as you imagine, the public universities must educate those students without any tuition revenue from either the taxpayers or the students.
Your reaction paper does not mention Jill Stein, who was on campus giving a speech earlier in March. She is a presidential candidate for the Green Party.
No comments:
Post a Comment