DOCSLIB.ORG

Republican Primaries 2008 John Mccain

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Republican Primaries 2008 John Mccain Republican Primaries 2008 John McCain Type of paper: Master Thesis Study program: Cand.ling.merc Title: Republican Primaries 2008 – John McCain Name of author: Evelina Krajina CPR-no: Supervisor: Edward Ashbee Number of pages: 74,5 Total amount of pages: 86 Number of characters: 138.809 Submission date: June 01st, 2016. Copenhagen Business School. Resume. Denne afhandling er lavet baseret på en interesse af hvorfor John McCain blev valgt som Republikanernes præsidentkandidat, da han var meget bagefter i meningsmålene. Dette kom til udtryk ved at han lå lavt i meningsmålene igennem hele 2007, hvorefter han fra december 2007 til januar 2008 næsten fordobler tallene, og går fra 16 procent i december 2007 til 31 procent i januar 2008. Dette bliver startskuddet til en videre stigning i meningsmålene frem til 5 marts 2008, hvor han kan kalde sig Republikanernes præsidentkandidat, igennem at have sikret sig flest delegerede. Afhandlingen tager afsæt i en analyse af de tre andre præsidentkandidater, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee samt Rudy Giuliani, som på dette tidspunkt var den absolutte favorit. I dette kapitel analyseres det, til en hvilken grad de tre præsidentkandidater udgjorde en reel modstander. I kapitel 3 analyseres det i hvilken grad John McCain var en maverick på den politiske scene, samt hvilke mekanismer gjorde at han blev opfattet som en maverick. Til dette introduceres konceptet omkring Pavlovs hund, for at give læseren en forståelse af principperne bag betingelseslæring samt hvordan disse bruges, hvorefter Pavlovs hund anvendes på John McCain. I kapitel 4 analyseres vigtigheden af politisk støtte, og hvad dette gjorde ved John McCains valgkampagne. Til dette introduceres konceptet celebrity endorsement, samt vigtigheden af dette i en valgkampagne. I kapitel 5 og 6 analyseres vigtigheden af en distancering fra Præsident Bush samt mekanismerne som gjorde at John McCain var i stand til at vinde nomineringen. På baggrund af dette konkluderes, det at John McCain var en anden type kandidat. Han var kendt som en outsider i det Republikanske parti da han ofte gik imod de konventionelle rammer. Denne afhandling er fundet frem til at John McCain igennem en distancering fra Præsident Bush formår at vende krigen i Irak til et positioneringsredskap, da han i kraft af en politisk vedtagelse om at øge antallet af tropper i Irak, bliver hyldet som en udenrigspolitisk ekspert. Dette, samt en 1 kombination af intens valgkamp i New Hampshire og støtte fra den Demokratiske Senator Lieberman gjorde at han opnår et momentum som fører til en sejr i New Hampshire. Denne sejr bliver cementeringen af hans stigning i meningsmålingerne og danner et grundlag for at han kan bruge krigen i Irak til et positioneringsredskap. På denne måde opnår han tilslutning da han formår at vende valgkampagnen til en diskussion om et emne han anses som ekspert på – krigen i Irak. 2 Table of Contents RESUME. 1 1.0. INTRODUCTION. 5 1.1. RESEARCH QUESTION. 6 1.2. METHODOLOGY AND DELIMITATION. 6 1.3. DATA COLLECTION. 8 1.4. APPROACH AND FRAMEWORK. 9 2.0 WEAKER CANDIDATES. 10 2.1 MITT ROMNEY. 10 2.1.1. SALT LAKE CITY WINTER OLYMPICS 2002. 11 2.1.2. CRITICISM OF THE SALT LAKE CITY WINTER OLYMPICS. 11 2.1.3 GOVERNOR OF MASSACHUSETTS 12 2.1.4. 2008 PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARIES 14 2.1.5. SUMMARY. 14 2.2. MIKE HUCKABEE. 16 2.2.1. THE GOVERNOR OF ARKANSAS. 17 2.2.2. SUMMARY. 18 2.3. RUDY GIULIANI 18 2.3.1. THE MAYOR OF NEW YORK. 20 2.3.2. CRITICISM OF DECLINE IN CRIME. 22 2.3.3. POST SEPTEMBER 11TH. 23 2.3.4. REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT. 25 2.3.5 SUMMARY. 26 2.4. CHAPTER CONCLUSION. 27 3.0. POLITICAL IDENTITY. 29 3.1. MAVERICK TENDENCIES. 30 3.2. THE BIPARTISAN CAMPAIGN REFORM ACT. 31 3.4. PAVLOV’S DOG. 33 3.5. POLITICAL BEHAVIOR AND PAVLOV’S DOG. 34 3.6. LEADERSHIP STYLE AND POW. 37 3.7. CHAPTER CONCLUSION. 38 4.0. BACKING FROM KEY INTERESTS. 40 4.1. THE TRANSFER MEANING MODEL. 41 4.2. THE TRANSFER MEANING MODEL APPLIED ON JOHN MCCAIN. 43 4.3. RESTRUCTURING INSIDE THE MCCAIN CAMP. 45 4.4. ENDORSEMENT FROM JOE LIEBERMAN. 46 4.5. ENDORSEMENT FROM OTHER KEY INTERESTS. 48 4.6. GENERAL ENDORSEMENT. 49 4.7. ENDORSEMENT FROM REVEREND JOHN HAGEE. 50 4.8. CHAPTER CONCLUSION. 51 5.0. DISTANCING FROM BUSH ADMINISTRATION. 53 3 5.1. THE NEED TO CREATE DISTANCE. 54 5.2. INSURGENCY AS THE BEST STRATEGY. 55 5.3. SENATOR MCCAIN ON FOREIGN POLICY. 58 5.4. SENATOR MCCAIN ON IRAQ WAR. 60 5.5. APPEAL TO ANTIWAR VOTERS IN GOP. 62 5.6. CHAPTER CONCLUSION. 63 6.0 POLITICAL OPPORTUNITY STRUCTURE. 64 6.1. NEOCONSERVATIVE PHILOSOPHY AND IDEALS. 65 6.2. PRESIDENT BUSH’ NEOCONSERVATIVE IDEALS? 66 6.3. SENATOR MCCAIN’S NEOCONSERVATIVE IDEALS. 67 6.4. SUMMARY. 69 6.5. NEW HAMPSHIRE. 70 6.6. CHAPTER CONCLUSION. 72 7.0. CONCLUSION. 74 8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY. 77 4 1.0. Introduction. The 2008 Republican Presidential Primaries presented a new era in elections. The incumbent Vice-President, Dick Cheney, did not wish to run for Presidency, as is usually the case. This meant that the floor for a Republican candidate was completely open and already in the end of 2006, it shaped up to be an early frontrunner in the mayor of New York City, Rudy Giuliani. Mayor Giuliani was previously acclaimed in his leadership status post the terrorist attacks on World Trade Center on September 11th, 2001 as was subsequently seen as an American hero. On the other hand Senator John McCain from Arizona also proved to be a frontrunner, with approval rates just below mayor Giuliani in late 2006 (Jones, 2007, Gallup). Senator McCain was known as a maverick in politics where bipartisan cooperation across the political aisle and political viewpoints which more often than not, seemed to go against the established Republican views. However in early 2007 Senator McCain’s approval rates started to decrease throughout the year 2007 where it reached a low point of 14 percent in December 2007 (White House 2008: Republican Nomination). However less than a month later on January 10, 2008, Senator McCain’s approval rate had surged to 33 per cent. The increase continued steadily until March 2008 where he had secured enough delegates to be able to call himself the Republican Presidential Nominee (Glaister (2008). Within the observant reader, these series of events raise numerous questions, namely how was Senator McCain able to increase his approval rate to the double from December 2007 to January 2008? And how was it possible for Senator McCain to make this strong a comeback as a candidate? 5 1.1. Research Question. Based on these events the research question is as follows: Why did John McCain win the Republican Nomination in 2008? 1.2. Methodology and Delimitation. The purpose of this thesis is to research why Senator McCain won the Republican Nomination in 2008. For this reason, the focus of this thesis will be distributed as follows; Chapter 2 will only focus on three other candidates, namely Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee and Rudy Giuliani. This writer is aware that there were more candidates in the initial election, but has chosen to focus only on these three candidates, as they presented the highest poll numbers according to White House 2008: Republican Nomination. Chapter 3 will focus on the political identity of Senator John McCain, and will in the argumentation present two instances where the senator worked across the political aisle on bipartisan collaboration. This chapter will also introduce the framework of Pavlov’s dog as a means of arguing conditioned learning based on repetition and put this in perspective of Senator McCain. This chapter will not take into consideration Senator McCain’s voting record as the argumentation of this thesis rests on the perceived image of Senator McCain and not necessarily the real image. Chapter 4 will introduce the framework of the transfer-meaning model as a theory of explaining the symbolic value of an endorsement. This chapter will hereafter apply the transfer-meaning model on Senator McCain, as a way of demonstrating how the theory affects the senator. This chapter will not go into depth on every endorsement senator McCain received, but will focus on the ones who added to his ethos, in order to substantiate the argumentation for this chapter. Chapter 5 will argue why it was necessary to establish a distance to the Bush administration, and how Senator McCain created this distance. This chapter will not take into consideration the similarities between Senator McCain and the Bush administration, 6 as this is considered beyond the scope. Chapter 6 will introduce neo-conservatism, and argue why this ideology presented an opportunity for Senator McCain to reposition the issue of war to his benefit. Lastly, this chapter will use the framework of political opportunity structure, as a means of arguing the momentum senator McCain gained in New Hampshire. Many of the limitations of this thesis have been discussed in the previous section and will be summarized in this section. The scope of this thesis is the Republican Primaries in 2008 and Senator McCain. For this reason, the Democratic Primaries of 2008 will not be taken into consideration. This writer is aware, that there is an aspect of reaction in politics and acknowledges the fact that some of Senator McCain’s actions may have been reactions towards Democratic candidates. However due to the scope of this thesis, this will not be taken into consideration. The possibility of a reaction aspect is not deemed high in importance as it, in this point in time, comes second to winning the nomination.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Suffolk University/USA Today National July 2015
    Suffolk University/USA Today National July 2015 Region: (N=1,000) n % Northeast ---------------------------------------------------------- 207 20.70 South --------------------------------------------------------------- 354 35.40 Midwest ------------------------------------------------------------ 227 22.70 West ---------------------------------------------------------------- 212 21.20 Hello, my name is __________ and I am conducting a survey for Suffolk University/USA Today and I would like to get your opinions on some issues of the day. Would you like to spend seven minutes to help us out? {ASK FOR YOUNGEST IN HOUSEHOLD} 1. Gender (N=1,000) n % Male ---------------------------------------------------------------- 484 48.40 Female ------------------------------------------------------------- 516 51.60 2. How likely are you to vote in the election for President in 2016 --very likely, somewhat likely, 50- 50 or not likely? (N=1,000) n % Very likely --------------------------------------------------------- 928 92.80 Somewhat likely ------------------------------------------------- 48 4.80 50-50 ---------------------------------------------------------------- 24 2.40 3. Do you think of yourself as a Democrat, Republican, or Independent? {IF INDEPENDENT, “Which party would you lean toward/feel closest to”} (N=1,000) n % Democrat ---------------------------------------------------------- 369 36.90 Republican -------------------------------------------------------- 313 31.30 Independent ------------------------------------------------------ 279
    [Show full text]
  • Virtues and Vices in Presidential Leadership
    Constitutional Character: Virtues and Vices in Presidential Leadership The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Thompson, Dennis F. 2010. Constitutional character: virtues and vices in presidential leadership. Presidential Studies Quarterly 40(1): 23-37. Published Version doi:10.1111/j.1741-5705.2009.03752.x Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:9464205 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Open Access Policy Articles, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#OAP Constitutional Character: Virtues and Vices in Presidential Leadership Dennis F. Thompson Harvard University July 2009 Consider two candidates for president. Candidate A while in office has engaged in questionable financial dealings and consorted with criminal types, but is an exemplary family man. Candidate B has had several extra marital affairs, but his financial record is above reproach. Whom should voters choose? Recent candidates may come to mind, but the question actually refers to the 1884 presidential election—the contest between Grover Cleveland and James Blaine. Blaine had corruptly profited from public office but lived an impeccable private life. Cleveland had a reputation for public integrity, but had been forced to acknowledge fathering an illegitimate child. Here is what one of Cleveland’s supporters said in the campaign: I gather that Mr. Cleveland has shown high character and great capacity in public office, but that in private life his conduct has been open to question, while, on the other hand, Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • The President's News Conference
    Administration of William J. Clinton, 1997 / Jan. 28 The President's News Conference January 28, 1997 The President. Good afternoon. Please be It will also allow a working family to deduct seated. Before I take your questions, I would up to $10,000 a year for taxes for the cost of like to make a brief statement about the bal- any college tuition or job training. And with anced budget that I will send to Congress next our special IRA for education, most parents will week. be able to save for college tuition without ever This budget shows that we can meet two of paying a penny in taxes. our most crucial national priorities at the same In addition, my balanced budget takes further time. It proves we can protect our children from steps to widen the circle of educational oppor- a future burdened by reckless debt even as we tunity. It provides a 25 percent increase in fund- give them the educational opportunities they ing for Pell grants, the largest increase in the need to make the most of the 21st century. maximum scholarship in 20 years, so that over The budget finally moves us beyond the false 4 million students will get up to $3,000 a year. choices that have held us back for too long We'll make 130,000 more students eligible for and shows that we can cut our debt and invest these scholarships, and we will open the scholar- in our children. The budget will help to renew ships to 218,000 older, low income Americans our public schools.
    [Show full text]
  • FEDEK'hlection COMMISSION 1 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 2 999 E Street, N.W
    - '"Ti FEDEK'HLECTION COMMISSION 1 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 2 999 E Street, N.w. 20i5 SEP 22 AH 3- 08 3 Washington, D.C. 20463 4 5 FIRST GENERAL COUNSEL'S REPORT 6 7 MUR 6939 8 DATE OF COMPLAINT: May 19,2015 9 DATES OF NOTIFICATION: May 26, 2015 10 DATE OF LAST RESPONSE: June 17,2015 11 DATE ACTIVATED: June 24, 2015 12 13 ELECTION CYCLE: 2016 14 EXPIRATION OF SOL: May 5, 2020 15 16 COMPLAINANTS; Brad Woodhouse 17 American Democracy Legal Fund 18 19 RESPONDENTS: Mike Huckabee 20 Pursuing America's Greatness and 21 Bryan Jeffrey in his official 22 capacity as treasurer 23 24 RELEVANT STATUTES 52 U.S.C. §30116(a)' 25 AND REGULATIONS: 52 U.S.C. § 30125(e)(1)(A) 26 11 C.F.R. § 300.2(ra) 27 IIC.F.R. § 300.61 28 29 INTERNAL REPORTS CHECKED: Disclosure Reports 30 31 FEDERAL AGENCIES CHECKED: None 32 33 34 I. INTRODUCTION 35 This matter involves an allegation that former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee 36 solicited excessive contributions for an independent-expenditure-only committee when, during 37 the announcement of his candidacy for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, he stated, 38 "[i]f you want to give a million dollars, please do it." Huckabee asserts that his statement was a 39 joke, not an actual solicitation of a million-dollar contribution. Although Huckabee's remarks On September 1, 2014, the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended, was transferred from Title 2 to new Title 52 of the United States Code.
    [Show full text]
  • Still Only a Theory? America's Continuing
    Still Only a Theory? America’s Continuing Problem with Evolution Ken Miller Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, & Biochemistry Brown University 10/16/09 Sam Brownback We Live in Mike(Really) Huckabee Interesting Times Tom Tancredo I’m curious. Is there anybody on the stage that does not believe in evolution? Mike Huckabee: “If anybody wants to believe that they are the descendants of a primate, they are certainly welcome to do it.” Who’s to blame for humans being classified as primates? Not Charles Darwin. Carolus Linneaus: the father of modern scientific classifcation, and a creationist X “Deus creavit; Linneaus disposuit” TwoTwoEvolution StateFederal Elections isTrials an Issue GeorgiaKansas that Divides; ;Ohio PA Americans “If you believe in God, creation, & true science, vote for ” .... “If you believe in This textbook contains material on evolution. Debbie. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, evolution, abortion,studied carefully. and” critically & considered. sin, vote for her opponent Judgment Day What does “Intelligent Design” mean? • IDTheists, is the byproposition definition, that believe “design,” in a in the formtranscendent of outside intelligence, intelligent intervention, sometimes is requiredexpressed to as account a view for that the there origins is an of livingintelligent things. design to the universe. • This distinguishesBut thisID from is not more what is general considerationsmeant of meaning by ID. and purpose in the universe, and makes it a doctrine of special creation. 2004: The Dover (PA) school board votes for an “intelligent design” lesson in biology. The Dover Board followed a Discovery Institute playbook on ID, and purchased the textbook Of Pandas & People.
    [Show full text]
  • International Trade Policy?”
    Conducted by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center Interviews with 1,010 adults in New Hampshire conducted by land line and cellular telephone on June 18-24, 2015 including 402 who say they plan to vote in the Republican presidential primary and 360 respondents who say they plan to vote in the Democratic presidential primary. The margin of sampling error for results based on Republican primary voters is plus or minus 4.9 percentage points and for results based on Democratic primary voters is plus or minus 5.2 percentage points. EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE: Thursday, June 25 at 5:00 p.m. CNN/WMUR/UNH Poll -1- June, 2015 (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY VOTERS ONLY:) "Next, I'd like to get your overall opinion of some REPUBLICANS who are running or may run for President in 2016. As I read each name, please say if you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of this person - or if you have never heard of him or her." "First, how about ... ROTATE 1 TO 19 1. (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY VOTERS ONLY:) “Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush?” (READ IF NECESSARY) "Would you say you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of him or don’t you know enough about him to say?" June 2015 FAVORABLE 50% NEITHER FAV. OR UNFAV. – VOLUNTEERED 12% UNFAVORABLE 33% DK / NEVER HEAR 5% 2. (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY VOTERS ONLY:) “Neurosurgeon Ben Carson?” (READ IF NECESSARY) "Would you say you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of him or don’t you know enough about him to say?" June 2015 FAVORABLE 40% NEITHER FAV.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Evangelical Support For, and Opposition to Donald Trump in the 2016 Presidential Election
    Portland State University PDXScholar Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses 9-1-2020 Understanding Evangelical Support for, and Opposition to Donald Trump in the 2016 Presidential Election Joseph Thomas Zichterman Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds Part of the Political Science Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Zichterman, Joseph Thomas, "Understanding Evangelical Support for, and Opposition to Donald Trump in the 2016 Presidential Election" (2020). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 5570. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.7444 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Understanding Evangelical Support for, and Opposition to Donald Trump in the 2016 Presidential Election by Joseph Thomas Zichterman A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Political Science Thesis Committee: Richard Clucas, Chair Jack Miller Kim Williams Portland State University 2020 Abstract This thesis addressed the conundrum that 81 percent of evangelicals supported Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election, despite the fact that his character and comportment commonly did not exemplify the values and ideals that they professed. This was particularly perplexing to many outside (and within) evangelical circles, because as leaders of America’s “Moral Majority” for almost four decades, prior to Trump’s campaign, evangelicals had insisted that only candidates who set a high standard for personal integrity and civic decency, were qualified to serve as president.
    [Show full text]
  • Carroll County Official Absentee/Provisional/Challenged Ballot
    CARROLL COUNTY OFFICIAL ABSENTEE/PROVISIONAL/CHALLENGED BALLOT OFFICIAL PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE PRIMARY ELECTION BALLOT OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY OF THE STATE OF GEORGIA MARCH 1, 2016 To vote, blacken the Oval ( ) next to the candidate of your choice. To vote for a person whose name is not on the ballot, manually WRITE his or her name in the write-in section and blacken the Oval ( ) next to the write-in section. If you desire to vote YES or NO for a PROPOSED QUESTION, blacken the corresponding Oval ( ). Use only blue or black pen or pencil. Do not vote for more candidates than the number allowed for each specific office. Do not cross out or erase. If you erase or make other marks on the ballot or tear the ballot, your vote may not count. If you change your mind or make a mistake, you may return the ballot by writing “Spoiled” across the face of the ballot and return envelope. You may then mail the spoiled ballot back to your county board of registrars, and you will be issued another official absentee ballot. Alternatively, you may surrender the ballot to the poll manager of an early voting site within your county or the precinct to which you are assigned. You will then be permitted to vote a regular ballot. "I understand that the offer or acceptance of money or any other object of value to vote for any particular candidate, list of candidates, issue, or list of issues included in this election constitutes an act of voter fraud and is a felony under Georgia law." [OCGA 21-2-284(e) and 21-2-383(a)] For President of the United States SPECIAL ELECTION (Vote for One) CITY OF CARROLLTON JEB BUSH For City Council BEN CARSON Ward 2 (To Fill the Unexpired Term of Mike Patterson, Resigned) (Vote for One) CHRIS CHRISTIE BRENT HARRIS TED CRUZ WES PHILLIPS CARLY FIORINA ADAM WILKINS LINDSEY GRAHAM RORY WOJCIK MIKE HUCKABEE Write-in JOHN R.
    [Show full text]
  • Borders by Consent
    Borders by Consent: A Proposal for Reducing Two Kinds of Violence in Immigration Practice Richard Delgado* Jean Stefancic** ABSTRACT We describe a new consensual theory of borders and immigration that reverses Peter Schuck’s and Rogers Smith’s notion of citizenship by consent and posits that borders are legitimate—and make sense—only if they are products of consent on the part of both countries on opposite sides of them. Our approach, in turn, leads to differential borders that address the many sovereignty and federalist problems inherent in border design by a close examination of the policies that different borders—for example, the one between California and Mexico—need to serve in light of the populations living nearby. We build on our work on border laws as examples of Jacques Derrida’s originary violence. We assert that laws that exhibit a high degree of originary violence lead, almost ineluctably, to actual violence and cruelty, such as that perpetrated by Donald Trump’s child-separation policy, and that consensual and relatively open borders are the most promising way to minimize both forms of violence, originary and actual. 338 ARIZONA STATE LAW JOURNAL [Ariz. St. L.J. INTRODUCTION Suppose that the underlying basis for a significant area of social regulation fails badly when viewed from the perspective of any of the leading theories of human organization and only holds appeal to those who are indifferent about perpetrating pain and hardship on fellow humans and need a plausible justification for doing so—namely that “they broke the law.”1 Consider current U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • NTS Total Election Reporting and Certification System - Condensed Recanvass Report
    FRX2Any v.08.00.00 DEMO NTS Total Election Reporting and Certification System - Condensed Recanvass Report GREENE COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS General Election 11/04/2008 OFFICIAL GENERAL ELECTION County Wide - PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS FOR PRESIDENT & VICE PRESIDENT Ashland - Page 1 Whole Number DEM REP IND CON WOR GRE LBN WRT WRT WRT WRT WRT WRT WRT Barack Obama & John McCain & John McCain & John McCain & Barack Obama & Cynthia McKinney Bob Barr & Wayne CHUCK BALDWIN ALAN KEES HILLARY RON PAUL BLAIR ALLEN MIKE HUCKABEE NEWT GINGRICH Joe Biden Sarah Palin Sarah Palin Sarah Palin Joe Biden & Rosa Clemente A Root CLINTON 382 117 218 12 19 2 0 2 1 WARD TOTALS 382 117 218 12 19 2 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Ashland - Page 2 VOI SWP PSL POP Blank Votes Void Roger Calero & Gloria LaRiva & Ralph Nader & Alyson Kennedy Eugene Puryear Matt Gonzalez 0 0 2 9 WARD TOTALS 0 0 0 2 9 Athens - Page 1 Whole Number DEM REP IND CON WOR GRE LBN WRT WRT WRT WRT WRT WRT WRT Barack Obama & John McCain & John McCain & John McCain & Barack Obama & Cynthia McKinney Bob Barr & Wayne CHUCK BALDWIN ALAN KEES HILLARY RON PAUL BLAIR ALLEN MIKE HUCKABEE NEWT GINGRICH Joe Biden Sarah Palin Sarah Palin Sarah Palin Joe Biden & Rosa Clemente A Root CLINTON 470 221 193 12 20 10 1 0 W:000 D:002 354 135 176 15 15 2 0 0 W:000 D:003 787 345 337 19 33 19 4 1 W:000 D:004 465 162 254 20 15 3 0 1 WARD TOTALS 2076 863 960 66 83 34 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Athens - Page 2 VOI SWP PSL POP Blank Votes Void Roger Calero & Gloria LaRiva & Ralph Nader & Alyson Kennedy Eugene Puryear Matt Gonzalez 0 0 0 13 W:000
    [Show full text]
  • The Inevitable Corruption of Indicators and Educators Through High-Stakes Testing
    The Inevitable Corruption of Indicators and Educators Through High-Stakes Testing by Sharon L. Nichols Assistant Professor University of Texas at San Antonio and David C. Berliner Regents’ Professor Arizona State University Education Policy Research Unit (EPRU) Education Policy Studies Laboratory College of Education Division of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies Box 872411 Arizona State University Tempe, AZ 85287-2411 March 2005 EDUCATION POLICY STUDIES LABORATORY EPSL | Education Policy Research Unit EPSL-0503-101-EPRU http://edpolicylab.org Education Policy Studies Laboratory Division of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies College of Education, Arizona State University P.O. Box 872411, Tempe, AZ 85287-2411 Telephone: (480) 965-1886 Fax: (480) 965-0303 E-mail: [email protected] http://edpolicylab.org This research was made possible by a grant from the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice. Table of Contents Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………. i Introduction………………………………………………………………………….. 1 Criticisms of Testing………………………………………………………………… 1 Corrupting the Indicators and the People in the World Outside of Education……… 6 Corrupting the Indicators and the People in Education.…………………………….. 20 Methodology………………………………………………………………………… 20 Administrator and Teacher Cheating...……………………………………………… 23 Student Cheating and the Inevitability of Cheating When the Stakes are High ……. 53 Excluding Students from the Test..………………………………………………...... 63 Misrepresentation of Dropout Data…………………………………………………. 83 Teaching to the Test..…….…………………………………………………….…….
    [Show full text]
  • The Last White Election?
    mike davis THE LAST WHITE ELECTION? ast september, while Bill Clinton was delighting the 2012 Democratic Convention in Charlotte with his folksy jibe at Mitt Romney for wanting to ‘double up on the trickle down’, a fanatical adherent of Ludwig von Mises, wearing a villainous Lblack cowboy hat and accompanied by a gun-toting bodyguard, captured the national headquarters of the Tea Party movement in Washington, dc. The Jack Palance double in the Stetson was Dick Armey. As House Majority Leader in 1997 he had participated in a botched plot, instigated by Republican Whip Tom DeLay and an obscure Ohio Congressman named John Boehner, to topple House Speaker Newt Gingrich. Now Armey was attempting to wrest total control of FreedomWorks, the organization most responsible for repackaging rank-and-file Republican rage as the ‘Tea Party rebellion’ as well as training and coordinating its activists.1 Tea Party Patriots—a national network with several hundred affiliates—is one of its direct offshoots. As FreedomWorks’ chairperson, Armey symbolized an ideological continuity between the Republican con- gressional landslides of 1994 and 2010, the old ‘Contract with America’ and the new ‘Contract from America’. No one was better credentialed to inflict mortal damage on the myth of conservative solidarity. Only in December did the lurid details of the coup leak to the press. According to the Washington Post, ‘the gun-wielding assistant escorted FreedomWorks’ top two employees off the premises, while Armey sus- pended several others who broke down in sobs at the news.’2 The chief target was Matt Kibbe, the organization’s president and co-author with Armey of the best-selling Give Us Liberty: A Tea Party Manifesto.
    [Show full text]