Emmanuel Parisse of the Agence France-Presse published an article concerning the religious leanings of the GOP candidates as showcased in a debate on November 19th. The candidates were asked how religion affected them personally and each one shared a story of how their lives had been influenced by a religious moment. Bachmann referred to her conversion to Christianity and used that to add to the central conversation of the debate, family values. Bachmann's consistent support of conservative social ideology was encouraged and allowed to blossom throughout this debate. She reiterated her beliefs on keeping marriage between a man and a woman and gave a convincing image of a woman devoting her political platform to Christian values (a phrase which has become somewhat interchangeable with "family values" in the political realm).
The massive amount of support Bachmann initially got during her campaign came from those who believed in re-instituting Christian values into American government. AFP quotes one strong supporter:
"I would have to say that basically it's nice to know that the contenders are very God based." Thom Moore, 34, told AFP. "Our country is faced with a situation where we're losing our Christian background. It's simply nice to know that they'll put it in there after having such a jerk as president. I'm not a happy person about Obama."
Watching the U.S. suffer a horrible recession has given both conservatives and hopeful liberals a scapegoat for our failures as a country, and many voters are facing increased turmoil in their personal lives that they want to see corrected. In times of crisis, it's know that people tend to become desperate or in some cases religious, so for desperate Americans to turn to a highly socially conscious Bible-thumper is perfectly understandable, but not all logical. A candidate's morality is an important issue, and for some people that means being religious, but for Michele to win, even before Rick Perry came into a race was a long shot, mainly considering her socially-centered campaign.
Sunday, November 27, 2011
Bachmann's Intelligence
In the CNN Debate on November 21, Michele Bachmann made a statement concerning the danger of allowing Pakistan to maintain nuclear sites considering substantial "threats" to the sites.
"We have to recognize that 15 of the sites, nuclear sites, are available or are potentially penetrable by jihadists. Six attempts have already been made on nuclear sites. This is more than an existential threat."
This article shows that Bachmann's threats were checked by the National Journal, and none of the information was found to be true. As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, Bachmann upholds a position of high responsibility where she has the power to choose which information dictates American policymakers' actions and monitor the flow of information to the House. This comment can only be considered one of two things: A fabrication of serious evidence, or a leak of secret information which has not yet been released. Either way, while her motives of protecting the U.S. from WMD's is noble, her execution is all wrong. A likely possibility is that the information she gave was fabricated, and was used only to further her argument. The necessity to take correct information and warp it in order to fit one's argument is completely illogical, any way you look at it. It's possible that the mindset necessary to accept the Bible at its every word, for it's face value in addition to its moral value, may be similar to the mindset it takes for Bachmann to be convinced that funding Pakistan will indirectly lead to funding jihadists. While this might be true on an entirely different level, fabricating evidence and moving through the electoral with an unreasonable and closed mind will not lead to logical or cooperative solutions. Theoretically, for her to win even just the primary election, she would have to make huge changes to her strategy and maybe even her personality, but among those things would be to stop telling lies.
Sunday, November 13, 2011
Bachmann and the "99%"
The Occupy Wall Street movement has resonated strongly throughout the United States, and it will most likely play a large role in the upcoming election in 2012. Obama has placed himself on the side of the protesters, and therefore has presumably gained some support both from some protesters and supporters of the movement.
On the other hand, Michele Bachmann is facing some animosity from protesters, and as you can see in the video above, she is having to deal with some very forward acts of confrontation on behalf of the "99%". While the event may have been disrespectful in the light of the occasion (a Veteran's Day parade), Bachmann handled the uprising rather gracefully, but still looked somewhat irked.
When she returned to the podium, she said with some chagrin, "Isn't the First Amendment great?", getting a laugh out of her audience, but snide comments like those will likely alienate her from the "99%", a movement on behalf of the American people, supposedly her voter base. Granted, she has made it clear that she has a very specific voting bloc that she is gearing toward, and granted, the position she was put in was understandably irritating, from her point of view, however, she will not be able to gain the support of the "masses" if she continues with this anti-protester attitude in accordance with many other GOP candidates.
While, unfortunately, she may not need the "99%" to get a win by playing politics and dominating a solid voting bloc, it looks like that bloc is not doing too well for her, as a recent Gallup poll put her at 5% with Perry in the lead, Romney in second, and Ron Paul in third. This should be a rough estimate of what her game plan has done for her so far, so it will be interesting to see if she decides to reach out to that "99%", or more likely, independent yet silent supporters of the Occupy movement.
Monday, November 7, 2011
Michele Bachmann on Social Issues
While she has had to dodge questions from various liberal biased interviewers and media sources, she has successfully deflected most of them, however, she seems to be returning to her far right social stances as the race progresses. Her points of view are not in danger of alienating her supporters because a majority of them believe what she believes, but should she continue, I still maintain, that she will have to change her game in a big way.
Bachmann is returning to accusing others of not holding the same, God-filled moral values as she does, and it will be interesting to see how much of them the American public can take. As the race continues, we may see a move on Bachmann's part even further towards those issues which she deems to be strongholds for those voters who support her, but we may also see an increasingly negative depiction of Bachmann in the media, a trend that may not produce positive results for Bachmann.
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Women in Power Positions
http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2011/06/hail_to_the_housewife.html
The role of women in politics has been a growing one ever since the acceptance of women into the political process since the ratification of the nineteenth amendment in the early twentieth century. Religion has recently started to play an important and highly publicized role in the political process because of female candidates of the past two elections alignment with the GOP and the prevalence of religion among some of their supporters.
Both during the 2008 election and so far on the road to the 2012 election, the role of the woman in an evangelist Christian home has been a widely publicized point of discussion between Bachmann and Palin critics alike. Their critics are both women who are against the submissive role politicians like Bachmann and Palin are expected to fill according to strict Christians, and members of branches of highly traditional/conservative Christianity who think that women would be abandoning their posts as women if they were to run for public office.
The article writes that, "Reverend Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, said that while he liked Palin's political views, he worried about the effect of her candidacy on her domestic priorities." Ideas like these are likely to face Bachmann again if she ever shies away from her already established claim that she would remain a submissive wife in the White House, though she believes that she and her husband respect each other, so it won't be a problem. However, feminists and women supporters of an egalitarian approach to religion will not be won over with that kind of talk. While Bachmann may be gaining favor with prominent men and other submissive women like herself, she will continue receiving opposition from women who believe the opposite on the role of women in the family.
This dichotomy is sure to divide a majority of women, whether it be in support of Bachmann's respect for family and duty on the home front, or challenge against Bachmann's passive attitude while she runs for arguably the highest position of power in our country. The problem that comes with evangelists supporting Bachmann's quest to be a powerful woman, yet still second in command in her own home originates from the idea that, "If his fellow Christians supported a woman in a position of civic leadership, they should logically support the notion of women exercising leadership in church and at home—but most of them don't."
Christian voters will have to decide whether they are willing to abandon the strict interpretation of the Bible which asserts that women be quiet and remain subservient to their husband, or if they will seek a new interpretation that allows women to compete with men in positions of power without abandoning their families or duties as women.
The role of women in politics has been a growing one ever since the acceptance of women into the political process since the ratification of the nineteenth amendment in the early twentieth century. Religion has recently started to play an important and highly publicized role in the political process because of female candidates of the past two elections alignment with the GOP and the prevalence of religion among some of their supporters.
Both during the 2008 election and so far on the road to the 2012 election, the role of the woman in an evangelist Christian home has been a widely publicized point of discussion between Bachmann and Palin critics alike. Their critics are both women who are against the submissive role politicians like Bachmann and Palin are expected to fill according to strict Christians, and members of branches of highly traditional/conservative Christianity who think that women would be abandoning their posts as women if they were to run for public office.
The article writes that, "Reverend Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, said that while he liked Palin's political views, he worried about the effect of her candidacy on her domestic priorities." Ideas like these are likely to face Bachmann again if she ever shies away from her already established claim that she would remain a submissive wife in the White House, though she believes that she and her husband respect each other, so it won't be a problem. However, feminists and women supporters of an egalitarian approach to religion will not be won over with that kind of talk. While Bachmann may be gaining favor with prominent men and other submissive women like herself, she will continue receiving opposition from women who believe the opposite on the role of women in the family.
This dichotomy is sure to divide a majority of women, whether it be in support of Bachmann's respect for family and duty on the home front, or challenge against Bachmann's passive attitude while she runs for arguably the highest position of power in our country. The problem that comes with evangelists supporting Bachmann's quest to be a powerful woman, yet still second in command in her own home originates from the idea that, "If his fellow Christians supported a woman in a position of civic leadership, they should logically support the notion of women exercising leadership in church and at home—but most of them don't."
Christian voters will have to decide whether they are willing to abandon the strict interpretation of the Bible which asserts that women be quiet and remain subservient to their husband, or if they will seek a new interpretation that allows women to compete with men in positions of power without abandoning their families or duties as women.
Sunday, October 23, 2011
On the Fence
Last Saturday, Michele Bachmann addressed Perry, Iowa, a town which has a 32% population of Hispanic residents. Throughout the race, the Hispanic vote has been acknowledged as a very important factor in the upcoming election. At the beginning of the Obama administration, Hispanics gave Obama a 60% approval rating which has dropped to about 49% in recent months. While Hispanic voters have usually voted blue, the increasing dissatisfaction with Obama may cause Hispanic voters to search for another leader.
While most Hispanics are either Catholic or some other form of Christian, they are considered swing voters because their minority status draws them to a party which outwardly encourages welfare, equality, and general support for the underdog. However, as the Obama administration is proven to be increasingly inefficient, the capacity of the Democratic party to engage support and incite this kind of welfare-based change is likely to decrease.
For Bachmann to say that she will build a double fence along the entire Mexican border with the U.S., as this articlein the Huffington Post Latino Voices section writes, does not appear to be a move that would bring Hispanic voters over to the GOP. Many questioned the motive behind making a speech like this in a town where a third of the residents are Hispanic. However, Bachmann may have a wiser goal behind this action; during the address she "rejected suggestions that talking about cracking down on undocumented immigrants is racist or anti-Hispanic" (Glover). By dividing the illegal immigration issue from attitude toward Hispanic voters, she is almost asking Hispanic voters to detach themselves from the illegal immigration issue as it does not affect them directly and is an issue that affects all Americans; Hispanic, Asian, African, what have you.
As we learned through Fowler's writing on Latinos and African Americans, Latinos are divided into many small groups depending on their religion and background, and within these groups, ideologies remain fairly consistent. In my opinion, Bachmann is trying to gain the Hispanic vote by appealing to those second-generation Hispanics who identify more as Americans than as Salvadorians, Cubans, or Venezuelans. These young Americans are more likely to appreciate solving an issue that will affect them as Americans, rather than fastening their political beliefs to an old identification to which they no longer have any connection outside of their family.
It will be interesting to see how many Hispanic voters start to think as Americans rather than as a minority group leaning on the Democratic Party.
While most Hispanics are either Catholic or some other form of Christian, they are considered swing voters because their minority status draws them to a party which outwardly encourages welfare, equality, and general support for the underdog. However, as the Obama administration is proven to be increasingly inefficient, the capacity of the Democratic party to engage support and incite this kind of welfare-based change is likely to decrease.
For Bachmann to say that she will build a double fence along the entire Mexican border with the U.S., as this articlein the Huffington Post Latino Voices section writes, does not appear to be a move that would bring Hispanic voters over to the GOP. Many questioned the motive behind making a speech like this in a town where a third of the residents are Hispanic. However, Bachmann may have a wiser goal behind this action; during the address she "rejected suggestions that talking about cracking down on undocumented immigrants is racist or anti-Hispanic" (Glover). By dividing the illegal immigration issue from attitude toward Hispanic voters, she is almost asking Hispanic voters to detach themselves from the illegal immigration issue as it does not affect them directly and is an issue that affects all Americans; Hispanic, Asian, African, what have you.
As we learned through Fowler's writing on Latinos and African Americans, Latinos are divided into many small groups depending on their religion and background, and within these groups, ideologies remain fairly consistent. In my opinion, Bachmann is trying to gain the Hispanic vote by appealing to those second-generation Hispanics who identify more as Americans than as Salvadorians, Cubans, or Venezuelans. These young Americans are more likely to appreciate solving an issue that will affect them as Americans, rather than fastening their political beliefs to an old identification to which they no longer have any connection outside of their family.
It will be interesting to see how many Hispanic voters start to think as Americans rather than as a minority group leaning on the Democratic Party.
Saturday, October 8, 2011
Values Voter Summit shows support for Bachmann
This weekend, the Family Research Council is sponsoring the Values Voters Summit. The summit will bring prominent figures of the Republican Party in to address voters, and to emphasize the importance of voting to improve American values this coming October. Michele Bachmann spoke on Friday, delivering an address reiterating her campaign platform and riling up the crowd with issues of "life, on marriage, on family, [and] on
religious liberty."
Major participants in the Summit were the National Organization for Marriage, the Family Research Council, and the American Family Council. Throughout her speech, Bachmann addressed many issues relevant to the aforementioned organizations and expressed her personal views on gay marriage, abortion, separation of church and state, and "dismantling bureaucracy", as she says. The groups to which she is obviously pandering will be a very important voting bloc for Bachmann, especially if she continues escalating or even just maintaining the level of her religious and values-oriented rhetoric, which she employed heavily in her address to the Values Voter Summit. She referred heavily to the greatness of "knowing the Lord" and pronounced the decision she made to "radically abandon myself and my life and my future to Jesus Christ."
Josh Lederman of The Hill, a publication based in Washington D.C. writes that "while the candidates will likely emphasize their conservative credentials to appeal to the social conservatives, it could make it much harder for them to inch back to the center if they win the nomination and face a general election, where they will have to win over more centrist voters... But Perkins said there’s no reason to worry that Values Voter could push candidates too far to the right." (See the rest of the article here: The Hill - GOP candidates take on social issues) With that in mind, the role of the Values Voter Summit attendees and voters like them is a very supportive one, where candidates are trying to establish rapport with them in order to secure firm backers in the future. However, the candidate who advances to the general election will either have to learn to adjust to not only organized groups like those listed above and appeal to a wider voter-base, or gain all of the support from their largely politically active fans and simply out-mobilize moderates and liberals. The former does not seem likely for candidate Michele Bachmann, who is very good at reaching specifically organized groups with values resembling her own, and said in her address to the Summit, "Don’t listen to these people who every four years tell you we have to select a moderate from our party and we have to settle for the sake of winning. I am here to tell you, we are going to win, not - this year we don’t settle. We’re going to win the White House." For Bachmann, it's too late to turn back. She has promised her devoted backers that she will continue to represent the rightest of the right, which will be a very difficult promise to uphold when she faces voters like the protesters from the Southern Poverty Law Center who set up a news conference outside the Values Voter Summit in efforts to call "values voters" out on their "hatred" of gays.
All in all, the organized groups present at the Values Voter Summit are fairly representative of the groups that Bachmann is targeting in her goal of gaining a devoted following. However, her competition with Rick Perry for the evangelical vote or the "values voters" vote will divide the voting bloc she is counting on, and her refusal to budge on far right ideologies will alienate her from various other prospective support organizations. Bachmann's success in the primaries and possibly the general election will depend on which organizations she is able to win over and how many of them she will lose to Perry's similar socially conservative, yet slightly more moderate.
The transcript for Bachmann's address to the Values Voter Summit can be found here: TIME - Bachmann Values Voters transcript
religious liberty."
Major participants in the Summit were the National Organization for Marriage, the Family Research Council, and the American Family Council. Throughout her speech, Bachmann addressed many issues relevant to the aforementioned organizations and expressed her personal views on gay marriage, abortion, separation of church and state, and "dismantling bureaucracy", as she says. The groups to which she is obviously pandering will be a very important voting bloc for Bachmann, especially if she continues escalating or even just maintaining the level of her religious and values-oriented rhetoric, which she employed heavily in her address to the Values Voter Summit. She referred heavily to the greatness of "knowing the Lord" and pronounced the decision she made to "radically abandon myself and my life and my future to Jesus Christ."
Josh Lederman of The Hill, a publication based in Washington D.C. writes that "while the candidates will likely emphasize their conservative credentials to appeal to the social conservatives, it could make it much harder for them to inch back to the center if they win the nomination and face a general election, where they will have to win over more centrist voters... But Perkins said there’s no reason to worry that Values Voter could push candidates too far to the right." (See the rest of the article here: The Hill - GOP candidates take on social issues) With that in mind, the role of the Values Voter Summit attendees and voters like them is a very supportive one, where candidates are trying to establish rapport with them in order to secure firm backers in the future. However, the candidate who advances to the general election will either have to learn to adjust to not only organized groups like those listed above and appeal to a wider voter-base, or gain all of the support from their largely politically active fans and simply out-mobilize moderates and liberals. The former does not seem likely for candidate Michele Bachmann, who is very good at reaching specifically organized groups with values resembling her own, and said in her address to the Summit, "Don’t listen to these people who every four years tell you we have to select a moderate from our party and we have to settle for the sake of winning. I am here to tell you, we are going to win, not - this year we don’t settle. We’re going to win the White House." For Bachmann, it's too late to turn back. She has promised her devoted backers that she will continue to represent the rightest of the right, which will be a very difficult promise to uphold when she faces voters like the protesters from the Southern Poverty Law Center who set up a news conference outside the Values Voter Summit in efforts to call "values voters" out on their "hatred" of gays.
All in all, the organized groups present at the Values Voter Summit are fairly representative of the groups that Bachmann is targeting in her goal of gaining a devoted following. However, her competition with Rick Perry for the evangelical vote or the "values voters" vote will divide the voting bloc she is counting on, and her refusal to budge on far right ideologies will alienate her from various other prospective support organizations. Bachmann's success in the primaries and possibly the general election will depend on which organizations she is able to win over and how many of them she will lose to Perry's similar socially conservative, yet slightly more moderate.
The transcript for Bachmann's address to the Values Voter Summit can be found here: TIME - Bachmann Values Voters transcript
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)