Category: THECRC
CHRISTOPHER PETER: LEADERSHIP MATTERS
THE CRC: LESSONS LEARNED
THE CRC: ROLE OF SOCIAL MEDIA IN POLITICS
There is not a single person who wants interference with our local, state, or national elections. The reality of life is that foreign influence campaigns in politics occurred long before the 2016 presidential cycle. It probably will happen again to some degree.
The impact from the influence campaign from Russian actors is highly exaggerated for political reasons. The campaign was poorly executed and there is no real proof that people changed their votes based on the clearly misleading information presented.
The hysteria is leading policymakers to place undue responsibility on social media companies to regulate political advertisements as well as speech on their platforms. Conveniently, private firms do not have constitutional restrictions government deals with.
Facebook and Twitter responded to social and political pressures in completely different manners. Facebook wants no part of suppressing free expression as it pushes back against criticism. On the other hand, Twitter decided to no longer accept paid political ads.
There is a general unfairness in attempting to make private firms shoulder the responsibility of policing speech. Government is essentially seeking a loophole to get around constitutional protections covering free expression. Censorship is not an appropriate response to fake news.
Early efforts to filter content demonstrated a clear existence of political and ideological biases at the highest levels of social media companies. Any non-liberal non-Democratic voices were silenced by so called moderators, especially many legitimate conservative media members.
The best defender against fake news is an educated, engaged, and informed society. While all should act in society’s best interest, there is always inaccurate or incomplete information out there. Not always purposeful but can still have the same impact.
People who read a wide variety of legitimate news sources and stay abreast of issues can clearly identify and filter out fake news. The advertisements used in 2016 were clearly unconvincing and amateurish. Many were released well after primary contest ended in the impacted state.
The real focus should be ensuring foreign governments cannot manipulate election results by altering vote counts or inappropriately accessing election data. States need to improve their systems and protocols around balloting. Paper ballots is an unnecessary regression.
Foreign governments may always seek to influence. The United States too might continue influencing foreign elections. The key is to ensure the voters voices is truly reflected in the results. In 2016, the voice of the voters was heard.
THE CRC: CHANGE AFTER CHANGE
Cindi McCain, widow of Late Sen. John McCain, commented that the current form of the GOP is not the same party that her husband served under for decades. In many ways, she is spot on.
The modern-day GOP is much different than the one that nominated Sen. McCain in 2008. In the same manner, the modern-day Democratic Party is much different than the party that elected Presidents Clinton and Obama.
Both the Republican and Democratic Party experienced strong shifts in the attitudes of their bases, which led to the purge of many moderate candidates. Including center right and center left in favor of more ideologically rigid ones.
The problem seen with moderate candidates was the inability to take accountability for policy failures as well as an overt focus on their own electoral and political outcomes rather than the policy impact on constituents.
For instance, Republicans grew tired of candidates running on conservative principles while campaigning only to govern almost similarly to their Democratic counterparts once elected.
The sheer number of unsatisfied voter groups in both parties made it clear to current candidates campaigning on salient principles better govern under those principles or face the prospect of a short time in office.
As we know, the appeal of candidates like President Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders is the perception of authenticity, using straight talk instead of carefully crafted and vetted political speak.
The more politically rigid tribes of both parties appear to prefer candidates that wear their emotions on their sleeves. Preferring populist theme in campaign style which places greater importance on emotions that rationale.
Many of these political rigid factions are not interested in seeing our political parties compromise, negotiate, or cooperate, but stake unyielding positions that make every issue a crisis.
The main goal for many supporting change in 2016 was to reposition the focus of elected officials, not create a chaotic style of government focused on power grabs, hysteria, and barbs traded back and forth.
All change brings intended and unintended consequences. The intended complete economic revival and strengthening of our national security, but unintended strong division and hysteria driven obstruction in response.
Where is the adult in this environment? A good question as no one has the incentive to take the high road or be the voice of reason. Any middle of the road sentiment will be mischaracterized for political fodder.
The media traditionally plays the voice of reason amid partisan bickering. But, many media members are not sitting on the sidelines this time. Many are taking sides and seeking to influence political outcomes.
Journalists traditionally separate their political and personal leanings from the underlying truths in coverage. While there are plenty of good journalistic content out there, many purposely cover issues from a slanted view.
The vetting of stories and investigative journalism does not appear to be at the same level in the Trump Era, as soundbites do more for ratings and clicks, especially amongst those holding strong anti-Trump views.
Many news organizations are not willing to set aside emotions around the subject of coverage, which clearly impacts how they cover that subject and what the editorial boards approve for release.
Journalists should cover subjects in a fair and objective manner, reporting facts consistently. Independent press is a fundamental institution in our society, but the press is not independent when there is a clear political agenda.
Every major problem in our society is typically solved by people, either through voices or innovations in our private sector. An important step forward will be shifts in attitudes and behaviors regarding politics.
Change not in who, but how they support a candidate, political party, or ideology. The idea of engaging with those that think differently or hold views that are not same is a foreign concept to some.
Political cheerleading and tribalism sentiments make many on the fringe believe that politics should be about who can yell the loudest or can harass their opponents the best. All better solved with negotiation, compromise, and debate.
The reality in politics is people you disagree can be right at times, even if you still disagree with their policies and points of view. Additionally, not every action, view, or behavior of favored candidates is right.
The political tribes in our society of those staunchly supporting or opposing President Trump rationalize every event, issue, and problem under the framework of their support.
The reality for those supporting President Trump is that while his policies prove effective, many of his behaviors are not appropriate for the office he holds. Supporters should be able to acknowledge this.
The reality for Democrats that staunchly oppose President Trump is that the party is highly obsessed with removing him from office and their actions reflect that of a political witch hunt, not enforcing federal law.
Prospective voters do not have to disavow support because of some flaws but should be acknowledge the shortcomings of their candidates and objectively account for them in their evaluations.
Consider how different President Trump would be viewed if could avoid some of the tweets that riled up many in our society? If he did not respond to every provocation with blunt force.
Consider how little Democrats have done while obsessing over Trump. How anger led the party platform to embrace social and economic ideals Americans long rejected. Ones that failed and impoverished millions across the globe.
Instead of enjoying the comforts of your political tribe, venture out and engage with people that oppose your point of view. Both can learn a great deal in respectful and deliberate discussions.
Then one can understand the greater possibilities that come with compromise and negotiation instead of partisan hysteria and anger. Our politics needed change, but not a complete overhaul.
The modern-day GOP is much different than the one that nominated Sen. McCain in 2008. In the same manner, the modern-day Democratic Party is much different than the party that elected Presidents Clinton and Obama.
Both the Republican and Democratic Party experienced strong shifts in the attitudes of their bases, which led to the purge of many moderate candidates. Including center right and center left in favor of more ideologically rigid ones.
The problem seen with moderate candidates was the inability to take accountability for policy failures as well as an overt focus on their own electoral and political outcomes rather than the policy impact on constituents.
For instance, Republicans grew tired of candidates running on conservative principles while campaigning only to govern almost similarly to their Democratic counterparts once elected.
The sheer number of unsatisfied voter groups in both parties made it clear to current candidates campaigning on salient principles better govern under those principles or face the prospect of a short time in office.
As we know, the appeal of candidates like President Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders is the perception of authenticity, using straight talk instead of carefully crafted and vetted political speak.
The more politically rigid tribes of both parties appear to prefer candidates that wear their emotions on their sleeves. Preferring populist theme in campaign style which places greater importance on emotions that rationale.
Many of these political rigid factions are not interested in seeing our political parties compromise, negotiate, or cooperate, but stake unyielding positions that make every issue a crisis.
The main goal for many supporting change in 2016 was to reposition the focus of elected officials, not create a chaotic style of government focused on power grabs, hysteria, and barbs traded back and forth.
All change brings intended and unintended consequences. The intended complete economic revival and strengthening of our national security, but unintended strong division and hysteria driven obstruction in response.
Where is the adult in this environment? A good question as no one has the incentive to take the high road or be the voice of reason. Any middle of the road sentiment will be mischaracterized for political fodder.
The media traditionally plays the voice of reason amid partisan bickering. But, many media members are not sitting on the sidelines this time. Many are taking sides and seeking to influence political outcomes.
Journalists traditionally separate their political and personal leanings from the underlying truths in coverage. While there are plenty of good journalistic content out there, many purposely cover issues from a slanted view.
The vetting of stories and investigative journalism does not appear to be at the same level in the Trump Era, as soundbites do more for ratings and clicks, especially amongst those holding strong anti-Trump views.
Many news organizations are not willing to set aside emotions around the subject of coverage, which clearly impacts how they cover that subject and what the editorial boards approve for release.
Journalists should cover subjects in a fair and objective manner, reporting facts consistently. Independent press is a fundamental institution in our society, but the press is not independent when there is a clear political agenda.
Every major problem in our society is typically solved by people, either through voices or innovations in our private sector. An important step forward will be shifts in attitudes and behaviors regarding politics.
Change not in who, but how they support a candidate, political party, or ideology. The idea of engaging with those that think differently or hold views that are not same is a foreign concept to some.
Political cheerleading and tribalism sentiments make many on the fringe believe that politics should be about who can yell the loudest or can harass their opponents the best. All better solved with negotiation, compromise, and debate.
The reality in politics is people you disagree can be right at times, even if you still disagree with their policies and points of view. Additionally, not every action, view, or behavior of favored candidates is right.
The political tribes in our society of those staunchly supporting or opposing President Trump rationalize every event, issue, and problem under the framework of their support.
The reality for those supporting President Trump is that while his policies prove effective, many of his behaviors are not appropriate for the office he holds. Supporters should be able to acknowledge this.
The reality for Democrats that staunchly oppose President Trump is that the party is highly obsessed with removing him from office and their actions reflect that of a political witch hunt, not enforcing federal law.
Prospective voters do not have to disavow support because of some flaws but should be acknowledge the shortcomings of their candidates and objectively account for them in their evaluations.
Consider how different President Trump would be viewed if could avoid some of the tweets that riled up many in our society? If he did not respond to every provocation with blunt force.
Consider how little Democrats have done while obsessing over Trump. How anger led the party platform to embrace social and economic ideals Americans long rejected. Ones that failed and impoverished millions across the globe.
Instead of enjoying the comforts of your political tribe, venture out and engage with people that oppose your point of view. Both can learn a great deal in respectful and deliberate discussions.
Then one can understand the greater possibilities that come with compromise and negotiation instead of partisan hysteria and anger. Our politics needed change, but not a complete overhaul.
THE CRC: CROWD SHAMING
Pictures may tell a thousand words but never the whole story. Please click above to experience Crowd Shaming to see how society jumps to conclusions fairly or unfairly.
THE CRC: SOUP OR SALAD?
Tough decisions have tough consequences. Click above for more.
THE CRC: BACK TO BUSINESS