Critical Thinking Resource Political Science © 2020 Dow Jones & Co. Inc. All rights reserved. About The Wall Street Journal’s Critical Thinking Resource We developed this guide to help you maximize The Wall Street Journal as a resource for your classes. You’ll be able to energize discussions and engage students with tangible examples of course concepts that your students can apply in the real world. In addition, with the help of faculty partners, we’ve curated a special collection of our most popular and thought-provoking articles across business. For each of these readings, we provide a summary, correlation to course topics, classroom applications and questions suitable for launching discussions and conducting assessments. Here are some of the many ways to incorporate WSJ into your courses: • Course Readings: Assign articles as required reading alongside your textbook sections. For best results, include assessment questions on quizzes and exams. • Discussion Launchers: Use articles to spur classroom and threaded discussions in online and hybrid courses on core concepts and current events. • Extra Credit: Allow students to read optional articles and answer assessment questions for extra credit. • Group Projects: WSJ is a rich source of real-world topics for group research and presentation projects. • Research Papers and Case Studies: WSJ features provide timely citations for research projects. Theme: 2020 United States presidential election Table of Contents 1. Trump, Democrats Gird for Fierce 2020 Fight in Arizona 2. Democratic Candidates Sanders and Biden Report Jump in Fundraising 3. TikTok Wants to Stay Politics-Free. That Could Be Tough in 2020. Trump, Democrats Gird for Fierce 2020 Fight in Arizona Reporter: Chad Day and Eliza Collins Reviewed By: Ed Miller, University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point Date: 1/02/20 Topics: Election, Presidential, Republican, Democratic, Political Party, Arizona Link to Article: Click Here Summary: Arizona, a state which had not voted for a Democratic candidate for president since 1948, is being considered a party competitive state for 2020. Though President Donald Trump won the state in 2016, Democrats did well in the 2018 midterm election, including capturing a U.S. Senate seat. Especially heartening to Democrats is the significant increase in suburban and exurban populations, who have tended to vote for Democrats. Trump’s handling of health policy and Democrats’ position on the economy are seen as key issues benefiting Democratic Party candidates this year. Further advantaging Democrats are the growth of the Latino population and the organizing effort of the hospitality workers’ union. However, Republican officials view the 2018 election results as an anomaly, arguing that Republicans will again be victorious in the state with Trump, who can turn out Republican voters, on the ballot. Classroom Application: Chad Day and Eliza Collins’ article, examining the Democratic Party’s success in the 2018 midterm election in the traditional Republican state of Arizona, provides a background to assess partisan change in states. Factors key to the 1932 realignment and the transformation of the southern states from solidly Democratic to Republican dominated can be discussed. In both of these cases, the influence of the parties’ presidential candidates can be analyzed. Clearly Franklin Roosevelt and Barry Goldwater were factors. With the emergence of President Donald Trump’s base as dominant in the Republican Party, students can analyze demographic shifts currently occurring in the parties. Especially notable is the moving of the white working class voter, not having a four-year college degree, into the Republican column. This has been especially true of men. Students can assess, based upon polling data including The Wall Street Journal/NBC News polls, whether non-college graduated white women are now deserting Trump. The class can also analyze the shift in the Latino vote, which at one time was split between party candidates, into becoming a significant element in Democratic Party support. This change can be applied to forecasts of party competition in several southern states. Continued on next page. cont. Questions: 1. After the loss in the presidential election by now Senator Mitt Romney, the Republican Party commissioned a report known as the “autopsy.” What were the main conclusions of the report? How could its finding affect President Trump’s bid for re-election? 2. Contrast forces in Arizona that seem to benefit Democratic Party candidates with those benefiting Republican Party candidates. 3. Why has the importance of unions, such as hospitality workers local in Arizona, become less important to Democratic Party presidential candidates in recent years in contrast to earlier periods? 4. What policies have Republicans pushed in many states that have blunted the electoral impact of the increase in African-American and Latino voters? How has a Supreme Court decision facilitated this? 5. Both Democrats and Republicans are spending large amounts in Arizona. What does money buy that is intended to improve each party’s prospects? 6. All but two states award their electoral vote in block to the presidential candidate winning a plurality of the vote. Would Arizona benefit by splitting their electoral vote on the basis of which candidate won each congressional district? 7. Senator Kyrsten Sinema won a Senate seat from Arizona in the 2018 election, becoming the first Democrat to do so in 30 years. What advantages will she have if she seeks reelection in 2024 over 2018? How will the political environment be different? 8. Arizona Republicans argue that they will do better in 2020 because President Trump will be on the ballot, which will increase Republican turnout. However, shouldn’t Republicans have been more advantaged in turnout in 2018, a midterm election? Related Article: Demographic Shift Poised to Test Trump’s 2020 Strategy Aaron Zitner and Dante Chinni 01/04/2020 Democratic Candidates Sanders and Biden Report Jump in Fundraising Reporter: Julie Bykowicz Reviewed By: Ed Miller, University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point Date: 1/03/20 Topics: Election, Presidential, Money, Contributions Link to Article: Click Here Summary: Fourth quarter reporting shows that among the Democratic Party candidates for president, Senator Bernie Sanders raised the most, $34.5 million. Following Sanders is former South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg, who brought in $24.7 million in the final three months of 2019 followed by Joe Biden at $22.7 million. Senator Elizabeth Warren was just slightly behind the former vice president at $21.2 million, a slight dip from previous quarters. Andrew Yang saw an increase, raising $16.5 million. Michael Bloomberg and Tom Steyer, billionaires, are mostly bankrolling their campaigns themselves. Sanders and Warren are not seeking donors who can give the maximum of $2,800 but rather small donations made online. Each of the Democratic candidates trail President Donald Trump in fundraising as the Trump campaign raised $46 million in the last quarter [not including funds raised by the Republican National Committee], giving him a $103 million in total to use against his Democratic opponent, similar to the amount on hand for former President George W. Bush’s re-election campaign. However, the strength of Democratic Party opposition to the president is illustrated by the combined total of Democratic candidates being double the amount bought in for the Republican incumbent. Classroom Application: Julie Bykowicz’s article, reporting on the fourth quarter funding raising submissions, can form the core of a discussion of money and elections. Concern about money in presidential elections led to the creation of a public fund, derived from voluntary contribution on tax returns, to avoid huge expenditures and influence of large donors. Agreeing to participate in public funding is the only way of limiting campaign expenditures, given the Supreme Court’s decision in Buckley v. Valeo, equating campaign spending with free speech. However, because of the limits accepting public funding would trigger, presidential candidates in recent years have not participated. The class can discuss benefits to candidates of raising substantial amounts of money. Significant war chests allow candidates to buy media spots, fund social media activities, hire staff, open offices, demonstrate the seriousness of the candidacy even with low poll numbers, pay for transportation, and allow candidates to devote more time to events and less time to raising money. Failure to raise sufficient funds has already caused several candidates to withdraw, the latest being Julián Castro, former Secretary of House and Urban Development. Still 14 Democratic candidates remain, many Continued on next page. cont. of whom have raised significant sums despite their single digit poll numbers. Students can offer reasons that the field will narrow as the primary season advances. Failure to obtain significant support in the early states typically results in a falloff of donations, causing candidates to drop out. This will not be the case for billionaire candidate Michael Bloomberg, who is concentrating on Super Tuesday states and giving less effort in early contests, particularly the Iowa caucuses. Candidates who run poorly in the early states, including Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, often decide to withdraw. The class can consider whether there should be a constitutional amendment to allow more campaign funding restrictions. Questions: 1. Why can’t Congress