US Current Political Affairs

Should Democrats Embrace the Center or Abandon It? 

Politics and social life are some of the issues that give direct control of a country’s progress. The idea of human rights, gender parity among other social issues is always the driving force among the many countries voting patterns. Just like in many countries, this is also eminent among the US political parties (Should Democrats Embrace the Center or Abandon It?). The Democrats and Republicans at any one given time have their differences based on which party is in power and have the majority act of passing an act of the Senate. Currently one of the major rivalries of ideas is the issue of women rights pertaining to abortion law. Ideally, the US population is a populous of various, ethnic groups as well as different personal opinions concerning some laws that are governing the nation. It is due to the glaring differences among the people that issue of laws has to past to give a firm verdict. 

The differences of opinions do not only affect the people but also affect the way people are likely to vote in the next general election. In the next six months, a bill is to be tabled on whether to abolish the abortion practices by the American women. The issue itself is controversial as it carries both the political wind of decision as well as the social interest of the women. On the political angle, the various parties have got their different views on passing the law. Some see the bill as some of the key turning points of determining if the current president will be in the office by 2020 for the next term (Should Democrats Embrace the Center or Abandon It?). The Democrats through their various representatives have got the ability to see the building notion flops Trumps next bid. Therefore, through these representatives, the voters are likely to be given a sense of direction on what to expect. Insofar, the Democrats are the ones charged with the responsibility of this issue of abortion rights to be abandoned or be upheld. Politically, any decision passed by the Democrats’ voters has got the impact of the reelection of Trump. 

For instance, some representatives’ feel that anti-abortion right should be upheld while others feel that it should not be voted. For example, recently Perez reiterated that and its quoted “Every Democrat, like every American, should support a woman’s right to make her own choices about her body and her health,” Perez said in a statement. “That is not negotiable and should not change city by city or state by state.” From this statement, therefore, it was clear that Perez was in support of abortion rights (Should Democrats Embrace the Center or Abandon It?). The statement directly was talking of all women across every part of America. The statement significantly shows how by passing that law it will mean more women voters would support. And in return, more people are likely to support the Democrat candidate based on this issue. However, few days’ later congressman Ben ray in July soon contradicted this notion and said they were working around the clock to see the anti-abortion law comes into existence. His statement was clear that the Democrats only need to have representatives in all districts and to woe more support. These two contrasting notions all have the political notion and the social motives in them. Nonetheless, the idea of passing the abortion rights touches on votes as well as social life of the women. Therefore, it is very categorical to enumerate that in every bill tabled it will be influenced by the past political ideas and will impact on how parties will react in action. The need for seeing a bill becomes a law is directly affecting future political ambitions and dictions. 

What Mark Zuckerberg Will Be Grilled On at the Congressional Hearings. 

The Senate of the US has some major duties and mandates of checking out for both the social and security details of the US citizens. Recently, the Senate houses will execute their mandate in grilling out some of the rising eventualities in the US and the world threats to peace (Shane, 2018). This mandate will be on the scrutiny of one of the renowned billionaire Mark Zuckerberg. The act of questioning of Mark is not only a show of concern to social and political issues but as well a point of notifying the public that no one is above the law. The Senate in its scrutiny will question the billionaire issues based on the social network platform known as Facebook. The idea of thorough questioning is one of the emerging issues that can impact on the US citizen privacy and fear of promoting terrorist acts. In the discussion, there are five major issues that arise. These issues arising are grouped or classified based on the danger alarms that they can trigger to the US population and other nations such as Russia. 

The key aspects to be discussed by the combined Senate Judiciary and Commerce committees include the privacy aspects of Facebook, Free trade commission association with Facebook, Russian Chicanery, fake news, political bias and polarization, radicalization and violence(Shane, 2018). From these themes of investigation, it is very clear that the political power of the governmental offices is extensive and important in ensuring stability in a nation. For the case of privacy, the Facebook through its executive Mark will be expected to explain to the Facebook user on the way their private information can be protected. This comes as over 50 million US citizen’s data were under siege and there is need to explain how such issues are to be handled (Shane, 2018). It is upon the executive to be satisfied with the answers given by the Facebook CEO. The other aspect is the investigation of Free trade commission (FTC). In the FTC investigation, the FTC was one of the partners of Facebook that were reportedly deceived the users on fraudulent charges of disseminating private information of Facebook users to other people. In fact, if the FTC is responsible it will pay huge fines. 

The third issue that Mark the CEO has to answer is the notion of Russian chicanery. In this, issue, it will form one of the most contested and fueled discussions concerning the Russians tempering with the election results of 2017 that saw Trump win the elections. It is stated that the Russians used Facebook networks to hijack information of elections. Therefore, Zuckerberg will have to explain such scandals that might discredit American election as not being free and fair. The fourth issue is the aspect of fake news spread where the Facebook platform has been used on several occasions to anticipate fake news. The CEO has to address this matter effectively if the idea of credibility has to stand for most information (Shane, 2018). The other issue that the CEO has to address is the issue of political bias and polarization. In past years the Facebook was seen to be biased on the Democrats’ news publication hence he has to answer if it is true and why it was biased. The final issue is radicalization and violence as seen in the social platform of Facebook. The platform in many occasions has been relaxed in removing the jihadist propaganda that causes panic fear among the citizens and the world at large. In answering these six key issues there will be clarity. 

New Jersey becomes a Key Battleground in Race for House Control 

As politics becomes an elusive topic in economies so does it impacts in states and regions of a nation. Recently in the US politics there are key areas that have become centers of attraction as far as active politics is to be mentioned. One of the key states that are hotly contested is the New Jersey. It is an area hotly contested based on three main factors (Corasaniti, 2018). One of the issues is the political temperatures between the two parties which are democrats and republicans. The second issue is the idea of strong politicians who are both able and powerful. The third issue is the idea of the Trump influence on the people as well as the economic factors. To start with the political temperatures, there is always a varying opinion from both the republicans and the democrats. With the Democrats having a large influence in the area they do feel they are entitled and have a say in voting the representative of that area. For instance, the recent post by the New York Times wrote and it's quoted that, “Ever since the election of President Trump, Democrats across the country have seen a predictable surge in energy among a base eager to take on the White House. What has been perhaps less expected is the uprising against the president coursing through more moderate suburbs, including many Mr. Trump, won’’. It is clear that the Democrats are more agitated to control more areas and New Jersey is not left out. The Republicans as well do have upper hand as they have enjoyed a long tenure of office and the incumbent representative is a strong man to beat. The party politics will be the people's decision to either vote the party or the candidate. Therefore, the New Jersey party politics fuels the urge to have to have a big number of representatives in the house hence effective control. 

The second issue is the idea of key strong politicians that are vying. For example, some of the key politicians are Andy Kim, Representative Leonard Lance, and Representative Tom MacArthur. All the three as what it takes to be the representative of the New Jersey. For instance, Representative Tom MacArthur is an influential, wealthy and knows how to play his cards well when it comes to politics (Corasaniti, 2018). Andy Kim, on the other hand, enjoys the support of various eminent people in the region. This shows that as far as party politics is concerned the members to be elected in those areas are key figures to make the area politically viable. In politics, one of the factors is the ability of the leaders as to whether they are able to deliver and command for support. Ideally, it is usually the personal traits in politics that earn him or her victory. 

The final aspect that makes the New Jersey a battleground is the Trump effect. The election of Trump that fuels both mixed economic and social notions. For instance, most of the people feel that Trump is more racial and his winning might only fuel the voters to oppose the party he is in which is the democrat (Corasaniti, 2018). Additionally, his notion of societal differences tends to support the Republicans. For instance, he has colored most of the people to vote MacArthur who voted for taxation bill as opposed to what other people expected. On the economic aspects, the New Jersey since Trump's election has enjoyed deductibility on some of the social amenities pays. For example, the push by Trump to reduce amounts charged on mortgages and local tax. This might directly influence the contest. 

The Paul Ryan Story: From Flimflam to Fascism 

Like many nations, it is clear that there exist forces that dictate the politics of given nation. This well represented in the US politics. One of the main forces in politics game is the idea of political experience one possess (The Paul Ryan Story). In the US, it extends from experience to polarization. Polarization is the major influential fact about US politics which we cannot run from. Ideally, polarization effect is witnessed in front of the public or the news where the public are given another picture different from reality. So to speak one can talk about the effects of polarization on political ambitions of a person. For the polarization and politics to be understood I would elaborate on the one politician known as Paul Ryan. This is a name that most people have come across based on his long-serving in political offices. The main question is why he did not vie for any political office with that versed experience. The main reason is political factor of fascism and the polarization of politics. So to start fascism is the kind of a radical authoritarian nationalistic that is featured by forced suppression of opponents. The definition of fascism speaks volumes when it comes to politics (The Paul Ryan Story). Ideally, in many opinionated writings or newspapers, the authoritarian power chose what to talk about a given politician so long as he or she is suppressed. So in relating the notion of fascism, politics our subject comes into existence to answer the question of why he could not vie for serious office in the Trump era. 

According to The New York Times magazine, one gets how Paul was played into the trap of polarization. For instance, his ideas and bills that he proposed or tabled and succeeded do not count much. However, his negatives sides are what has been aired and published severally. For example, The New York Times dated April second, 2018 it is written “About Ryan: Incredibly, I’m seeing some news reports about his exit that portray him as a serious policy wonk and a fiscal hawk who, sadly, found himself unable to fulfill his mission in the Trump era. Unbelievable.”(The Paul Ryan Story). This shows that most American people were quick to read what the media said about Paul and forgot about his past bills. On the contrary, an opinion also once praised Paul actions not before he was a common man. For example, the media had always covered all the good things but soon after the Trump’s era, it was a different twist of events. 

Therefore, it can be deduced from these opinions that the effect of fascism is practical when it comes to politics. An argument that supports the idea of fascism is evident in Paul Ryan scenario. This would be based on two facts, one is power influence and two is oppression. On the aspect of power influence, Paul Ryan who used to be very among the Democrats was soon losing it. There were definitely powers that were suppressing his bid for office (The Paul Ryan Story). One the aspect of oppression it would be deduced that the Trump and the strong political bigwigs were the ones who did not want him to succeed. For example, at some point when he was opposing Trump he was well placed and had influence. Then soon after their private meeting, he denounced his candidature and not before long Trump praised him for being a loyal servant of the country. From this incidence, it is not only absurd but also ironical. In the political opinion, it would be that the same powers that supported him were now supporting Trump and could not take chances with the letting him succeed. Therefore, the notion of fascism and politics are secret tools of the campaign. 

What Motivates Voters More Than Loyalty? Loathing 

The current politics is moving far from responsible convincing of voters to the negative attitudes of the voters. As the quote goes that the end justifies the means. The quote has directly reflected the current on the current state of how politicians will do anything to create a distinction between their areas of vote haunt (What Motivates Voters More Than Loyalty?). Ideally, the notion of loathing in politics is becoming a trend both in the developed and developing nations. For instance, it is easy to spot politicians use racist utterances against the opposing sides. This means that it is the virtue of integrity and sense of accountability is losing its meaning in politics. As the time is moving the negative attitudes has deeply encroached the politics leaving the voters with a contemptuous attitude towards the opponents. In cases that we the voters do not reason out facts, we will soon take personal differences in open grounds of the battlefield. Before going deep into this vise of politics it is important we take note of the causes of the bad behaviors such as loathing in politics. In many incidents, it would be very easy for a candidate that has molested a child to win an election. This is because of the anger and needs to support one of our own party representatives. 

One of the main causes is the lack of responsibility and accountability among the parties and the politicians. That is, most of the politicians and their parts have developed the attitude of not caring about the repercussions of the voters feeling provided that they win. In recent statistics there is angrier party follows than ever before in US history. For instance, in the last US presidential elections it is recorded that, “In 2012, 33 percent of Democrats and 43 percent of Republicans described themselves as angry at the opposing party’s presidential candidate “most of the time” or “just about always.” (What Motivates Voters More Than Loyalty?).In 2016, the percentage of Democratic voters who said they were this angry at Trump rose to 73 percent, and the percentage of Republicans with that level of hostility toward Hillary Clinton rose to 66 percent” From this figures, therefore, it is undisputable of what has been the increase in negative attitude towards different party followers. 

Ideally, if the sense of accountability and following of ethics in politics is followed we are likely to see a reduction in negative attitudes. On the contrary, if not stopped soon we will have a majority of racial and more ethical parties which would spark enmity. The other issue that allows for negative attitudes in politics is the idea of voting partnership. The negative partnership voting means the formation of alliances with only one aim of being in power. The negative partnership is more aligned with the voter’s side than in the politician’s side. It is usually fueled by the lack of reasoning that is logical to the reason why voters must heed election requirements. Additionally, in such times of voting based on a partnership, the voters are driven with the motive of defeating the opposing camp and nothing more than that. This not only makes the partners uncontrollable but also short of reasoning (What Motivates Voters More Than Loyalty?). Nonetheless, it is vice that should be condemned heavily as soon we might lose the sense of a nation. The issue of loathing is well attributed to the negative ideas of embracing racism, negative stereotyping among others. This vise explains why it is easy for people to be identified with their parties among the US citizens. 

The president is not above the Law 

In the US the presidency has an office comes with many powers and mandates to the people and the US as a nation. As much as the president of the US has a lot of power he still remains under oath of truth as well as following the rule of law. Now, one can affirm the Bill Clinton actions of 1999 (The Editorial Board) when he was convicted of a misconduct that was defaming the office of the president. Nonetheless, the news played it part and the truth about Clinton’s affair was revealed. This was a plus to him as a president when he decided to apologize and took the bull by its own. In addition to the part played by the media, in revealing the truth the members of the houses especially the Senate were on his neck to resign. All these were made possible because there was the rule of law that no one is above. Insofar, the current US presidency held by Trump has been in the limelight. Trump on several occasions since getting into the office has been in on and off issues with both the citizens and laws of the state. One thing that the citizens of US need to be reminded is that the president is not above the law. It is a common say that has the powerful meaning that even the president can be subjected to the thorough scrutiny of what the law requires. However, in Trump era since the election, some issues have been eminent. The issues include the interference with the separate arms of the government. 

In recent newspaper in The Times New York it is recorded “But if the president does move against the investigators, it will be up to Congress to affirm the rule of law, the separation of powers and the American constitutional order. The miserable polarization and partisan anger that have been rising in American life for decades will hit a new crescendo, and that will present congressional Republicans with a heavy burden indeed” (The Editorial Board). From these words, it is clear that soon the Senate will be left with no choice but to take action against some of the Trump doings. Nonetheless, what is the impact if the president does not follow the rule of law? This is the main question that addresses the notion of the president not being above the law. If in case the president ac on the matters based on personal interest it would spark a lot of controversies among the people of the state. For instance, the voters who voted him in may lose confidence while the opposing side might gain rise hence leading to contrasting opinion (The Editorial Board) . The contrast is not good for the stability and peace since every individual may act as they want while referring to the president’s action. Additionally, in case the president acts above the law the separate arms of the government such as the court system will be threatened as they are undermined. That is, as the president fails to follow the law it is the custodians of the law that are seen as the weaker organ which cannot stand firm. As a result, other independent organs may as well follow suit of acting as they want. In such happenings, one thing will remain clear that the nation will be uncontrollable with everyone acting as they want. It, therefore, calls for proper reasoning that the president is not above the law at any given point. 

Trump’s Tool Kit Does Not Include the Constitution 

Currently, there has been a bit of controversy and issues based on the way president Trump take up his duties as a president. Perhaps the people were worn against voting him yet they did not heed hence it is time to earn their pie. Nonetheless, before attesting to what Trump democracy is like as a president it is important to analyze how the public view his actions. The public here refers not to the bigger population but rather to the free thinkers who form a representative of the whole population. That is the group of scientist, politicians, political experts, and the journalist. Like any other nation, it is important to have checks and balances on the Trumps government in relation to public opinion. Insofar, as much as he remains the president the constitution remains the reference point to most of his actions as well as the US people. Therefore, in checking of the Trump regime it is only possible to judge his action in relation to constitutional requirements. So to start on the scientist desk, one would mention that recently groups of scientist such as Rochester, Dartmouth, and Yale through their researchers have revealed some important facts. For instance, it’s a fact that in assessing of the congress, senate and the courts there has been a drop of close to 10% on defending of the constitution (Trump's Tool Kit Does Not Include the Constitution) . In progress of such trends will mean the is the growth of threats to US democracy hence a development of an idea of constitutional undermining. 

On the politician desk, it is far much open and evident that Trump has been so contemptuous of his opponents. For instance, it is noted that “On Monday, he charged that Democratic members of the House and Senate were treasonous in their failure to applaud him during his State of the Union address. In a speech in Blue Ash, Ohio, Trump described how he saw it”. This show where we are headed with the current political temperatures of the opponents. It, therefore, means that if something is not done the democracy would fall beyond the expected limits. Additionally, the experts have revealed that as years go by then there has been a tremendous decline of the public faith and confidence on issues of politics. The findings are based on the various assessments of the public actions. In the analysis, it was very evident that the public with times has been losing interest in democracy and other public offices. 

Ideally, in the research, if a mater is proved then it means that it is now a fact that must be dealt with immediately (Trump's Tool Kit Does Not Include the Constitution) . Therefore, one would ask what is the Trump regime doing to earn back the public confidence and restore of constitutional glory. It is far much important for the Trump to see the US citizens have confidence in public offices. One the things that the experts and the public have seen is the attacks on the judicial system which is independent organ. Additionally, one can also point the attack on the FBI. All these attacks do not only show lack of interest by the president to respect independent organs but lack of interest in constitutional requirements. It is never wrong to attack the other organs but rather it should be done based on law grounds not by the use of political office power seen in Trumps dealing. Nonetheless, there is need to have a proper organization of facts from the findings of the public representatives to help identify areas of loopholes. 

References 

Opinion | Trump's Tool Kit Does Not Include the Constitution. (2018, February 8). Retrieved from: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/08/opinion/trump-democracy-midterm-elections.html 

Opinion | The Paul Ryan Story: From Flimflam to Fascism. (2018, April 12). Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/12/opinion/paul-ryan-fascism.html 

Opinion | What Motivates Voters More Than Loyalty? Loathing. (2018, March 1). Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/01/opinion/negative-partisanship-democrats-republicans.html 

Opinion | Should Democrats Embrace the Center or Abandon It? (2018, March 22). Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/22/opinion/conor-lamb-primaries-democrats-left-center.html 

Corasaniti, N. (2018, April 5). New Jersey Becomes a Key Battleground in Race for House Control. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/05/nyregion/new-jersey-house-democrats-campaigns.html?smid=pl-share 

Shane, S. (2018, April 9). What Mark Zuckerberg Will Be Grilled On at the Congressional Hearings. Retrieved from: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/09/us/politics/mark-zuckerberg-congressional-hearings-topics.html?smid=pl-share 

The Editorial Board. (2018, April 15). Opinion | The President Is Not Above The Law. Retrieved from: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/04/15/opinion/editorials/president-above-rule-law.html?smid=pl-share