I ended up 18th out of 41, not a great result, but I really think that by delaying my setup even by a few days at the start of the game, I lost momentum. Others that got their teams underway more quickly clearly had an advantage. So, lesson learned: start this kind of thing IMMEDIATELY.
On a fundamental level, I learned how the whole "fantasy game" thing works. I've heard about fantasy football and baseball but never knew what it was, so it was interesting to learn about the idea. But more importantly, from this particular game I learned that what goes on in Congress is much more detailed than I imagined. I don't know what I thought those folks do everyday, but it's more than I thought. I also enjoyed seeing some of the faces I listen to on the radio so often.
The game needs better instructions, though. It seems like the site expects that only real poli sci nerds are going to be interested, and they already understand all this stuff anyhow, so instructions only need be minimal. Perhaps the materials are there and just badly organized, I don't know, but I'm sure I would have done better if I'd been 100% confident about what I was doing.
Sunday, November 4, 2007
Blog Entry #5
This article
http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1573404/20071102/index.jhtml
from the MTV website (a surprisingly respectable news source) is about the popular talk-show host and political comedian Stephen Colbert, who announced recently on his show that he would run for president. Although he may have been saying it tongue firmly in cheek, it was clear he intended to actually run through the steps. His effort to get on the ballot, though, was stopped by the Democratic party in his home state of South Carolina. Why? To win the presidency, one must be on the ballot in all 50 states, and to achieve that takes a lot of money – hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars; funds the party considers better channeled to more “viable” candidates.
Current campaign laws consider anyone who raises $5000 to be a “serious” candidate, but the realities of elections dictate differently.
It’s interesting that we so often emphasize how “our (the average person’s) voices count”, but a man such as Colbert, who has a substantial following, was completely blown off by his own party. It really emphasizes for me how the intentions of our Constitution and laws are often trumped by the realities of politics.
The MTV article simply reports this as straight news and includes a little background on laws governing presidential campaigns as well as some quotes from Colbert and other people. Other articles, such as this one
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7074694.stm
from the BBC, included less straight info and more opinion quotes, especially from the members of the committee which rejected Colbert.
http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1573404/20071102/index.jhtml
from the MTV website (a surprisingly respectable news source) is about the popular talk-show host and political comedian Stephen Colbert, who announced recently on his show that he would run for president. Although he may have been saying it tongue firmly in cheek, it was clear he intended to actually run through the steps. His effort to get on the ballot, though, was stopped by the Democratic party in his home state of South Carolina. Why? To win the presidency, one must be on the ballot in all 50 states, and to achieve that takes a lot of money – hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars; funds the party considers better channeled to more “viable” candidates.
Current campaign laws consider anyone who raises $5000 to be a “serious” candidate, but the realities of elections dictate differently.
It’s interesting that we so often emphasize how “our (the average person’s) voices count”, but a man such as Colbert, who has a substantial following, was completely blown off by his own party. It really emphasizes for me how the intentions of our Constitution and laws are often trumped by the realities of politics.
The MTV article simply reports this as straight news and includes a little background on laws governing presidential campaigns as well as some quotes from Colbert and other people. Other articles, such as this one
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7074694.stm
from the BBC, included less straight info and more opinion quotes, especially from the members of the committee which rejected Colbert.
Saturday, October 27, 2007
Fantasy Congress #5
I tried to be so wily in my team member choices; seeking the people who were not HUGE names but active enough that I'd heard them on NPR. I thought this would surely at least bump me up the list.
But it seems that the people at the top of the list chose the really big names: Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, etc. and they've had more success. I guess there's a reason those politicians are so well known - lots of legislation and thus better scores for the people that chose them. Drat.
But it seems that the people at the top of the list chose the really big names: Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, etc. and they've had more success. I guess there's a reason those politicians are so well known - lots of legislation and thus better scores for the people that chose them. Drat.
Monday, October 15, 2007
Fantasy Congress Post #4
Today I dropped Olympia Snow and Ron Paul, both big names who came highly recommended and have turned out (in the last week, anyway) to be bumps on logs. I drafted two others based strictly on their RBA percentage. We'll see if a straight statistical pick does any better.
Saturday, October 6, 2007
Fantasy Congress #3
My best performer has been Harry Reid. This is no surprise to me – he is in the news all the time and is an obviously active member of Congress. I am really disappointed, however, in the recent performance of some of my other choices, particularly Olympia Snow and John Conyers. Perhaps it was just a slow week for them, so I’m giving them another few days.
Blog Entry #3
Part A
Figure 10.3 2004 Presidential Election Turnout by Social Group
1. This chart shows the percentages of people in various categories who voted in the 2004 Presidential election. For example, it shows that 65% of eligible women voted, while 62% of eligible men voted. It gives data for 5 categories: race, gender, age, education,, and income.
2. Many conclusions can be drawn from this chart. A significantly higher percentage of people with advanced education voted (84%) and the rate of voter turnout decreases with each drop in level of education. Therefore we can conclude that education plays a role in whether one votes. Likewise, higher income individuals vote in higher percentages. Interest in voting seems to increase with age. Percentages by gender are fairly close, and I think it would be difficult to draw any meaningful conclusions without reviewing data from other elections. This is also the case with the racial breakdown (although text in the book does discuss reasons for these numbers, the chart by itself does not provide sufficient data).
3. It is difficult to draw solid conclusions based on data from only one election; it would be useful to have a comparison to another election, even if simply plus or minus percentage points. This is particularly true of the gender and race categories.
Figure 10.4 Presidential Vote in 2004, by Social Group
1. This chart is also about the 2004 election, but it offers much more data, including which candidate the various social groups chose.
2. One could draw all kinds of conclusions form this chart but there is a lack of supporting data to speak broadly about elections or voters in general, as the data only regards this particular election. For example, a considerably higher number of black voters chose John Kerry, the Democratic candidate; from this one might conclude that there are more black Democrats than black Republicans (this may or may not be true, more data is needed). Similarly, a considerably higher number of voters who described themselves as having a better financial situation today chose George Bush, the Republican candidate; from this one might conclude that a higher percentage of voters believe Republicans are better at maintaining a healthy economy.
3. Again, data from another election would help support any long-range arguments one might make based on this data.
Part B
One might conclude based on the charts that women value their right to vote slightly more than men (although I have seen no practical evidence).
I believe everyone who is eligible to vote should make every effort to do so. Historically, denying groups the right to vote has been a powerful device for gaining and holding power. Claiming the right to vote is a claim to equality. I consider the oft-raised issue of “my vote doesn’t count” completely separate; even if true, one should vote simply as an exercise of personal power.
* I would like to encourage all of my classmates to do a little extra reading about Sojourner Truth. Have a look at the Wikipedia page about her life – she was a remarkable woman I knew nothing about before reading this assignment, and she is well worth your attention.
Figure 10.3 2004 Presidential Election Turnout by Social Group
1. This chart shows the percentages of people in various categories who voted in the 2004 Presidential election. For example, it shows that 65% of eligible women voted, while 62% of eligible men voted. It gives data for 5 categories: race, gender, age, education,, and income.
2. Many conclusions can be drawn from this chart. A significantly higher percentage of people with advanced education voted (84%) and the rate of voter turnout decreases with each drop in level of education. Therefore we can conclude that education plays a role in whether one votes. Likewise, higher income individuals vote in higher percentages. Interest in voting seems to increase with age. Percentages by gender are fairly close, and I think it would be difficult to draw any meaningful conclusions without reviewing data from other elections. This is also the case with the racial breakdown (although text in the book does discuss reasons for these numbers, the chart by itself does not provide sufficient data).
3. It is difficult to draw solid conclusions based on data from only one election; it would be useful to have a comparison to another election, even if simply plus or minus percentage points. This is particularly true of the gender and race categories.
Figure 10.4 Presidential Vote in 2004, by Social Group
1. This chart is also about the 2004 election, but it offers much more data, including which candidate the various social groups chose.
2. One could draw all kinds of conclusions form this chart but there is a lack of supporting data to speak broadly about elections or voters in general, as the data only regards this particular election. For example, a considerably higher number of black voters chose John Kerry, the Democratic candidate; from this one might conclude that there are more black Democrats than black Republicans (this may or may not be true, more data is needed). Similarly, a considerably higher number of voters who described themselves as having a better financial situation today chose George Bush, the Republican candidate; from this one might conclude that a higher percentage of voters believe Republicans are better at maintaining a healthy economy.
3. Again, data from another election would help support any long-range arguments one might make based on this data.
Part B
One might conclude based on the charts that women value their right to vote slightly more than men (although I have seen no practical evidence).
I believe everyone who is eligible to vote should make every effort to do so. Historically, denying groups the right to vote has been a powerful device for gaining and holding power. Claiming the right to vote is a claim to equality. I consider the oft-raised issue of “my vote doesn’t count” completely separate; even if true, one should vote simply as an exercise of personal power.
* I would like to encourage all of my classmates to do a little extra reading about Sojourner Truth. Have a look at the Wikipedia page about her life – she was a remarkable woman I knew nothing about before reading this assignment, and she is well worth your attention.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Fantasy Congress picks
My first set of fantasy congress picks were chosen based on names I was familier with from the news. I tried to choose people who are in the news a lot, even if I was not extensively familer with their activities, thinking they would be very active and help my score.
But they were mostly duds, so I have traded most of them away in favor of choices from a list of recommendations I found on someone's post in the forum. Here's hoping I do a little better this week!
But they were mostly duds, so I have traded most of them away in favor of choices from a list of recommendations I found on someone's post in the forum. Here's hoping I do a little better this week!
Monday, September 24, 2007
My Fantasy Congress Selections
Eleanor Holmes Norton (D)
Ciro Rodriguez (D)
Maxine Waters (D)
Adam Schiff (D)
Mike Thompson (D)
Claire McCaskill (D)
Harry Reid (D)
Patrick Leahy (D)
Dick Durbin (D)
John Conyers (D)
Ciro Rodriguez (D)
Maxine Waters (D)
Adam Schiff (D)
Mike Thompson (D)
Claire McCaskill (D)
Harry Reid (D)
Patrick Leahy (D)
Dick Durbin (D)
John Conyers (D)
Saturday, September 22, 2007
The Most Pressing Issue
It's really hard to choose just one issue to call the most pressing in American politics, but if forced I have to choose the government itself. More specifically, the current administration has bent and broken so many rules, customs, and laws that I feel the whole face of American government has changed. Any action can be justified "in the interests of national security". Wiretapping, troop increases, even the removal of funding for domestic programs in favor of the war have all been virtually ignored by the citizenry.
The resource in question is unrestricted power and lack of accountability, the when is not only now but into future admistrations (regardless of party), and the how is fearmongering. Power has been fought over since the dawn of humanity, but these days politics have all the trappings of a big-budget Hollywood film.
Our President needs to listen to the people. Our representatives need to stop acting out of fear ("I can't vote for that - I'll be accused of not supporting the troops!"). We need to hold our government to account.
The resource in question is unrestricted power and lack of accountability, the when is not only now but into future admistrations (regardless of party), and the how is fearmongering. Power has been fought over since the dawn of humanity, but these days politics have all the trappings of a big-budget Hollywood film.
Our President needs to listen to the people. Our representatives need to stop acting out of fear ("I can't vote for that - I'll be accused of not supporting the troops!"). We need to hold our government to account.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)