Brett Iverson starts the lecture by explaining that the purpose of this university lecture is to put the election in a broader perspective without rhetoric or emotion. These speakers spoke to us about American politics without giving us their views and without trying to manipulate our vote. He did however share his intense desire for all of us to register to vote. This was a perfect segue to the first speaker who talked more in depth about this issue.
The first speaker Mark Updegrove opened with an anecdote about meeting a freshman Congressman in his junior year in high school. He spoke of being in awe of meeting this Congressman and asked how many of us want to meet our Congressman. I awkwardly raised my hand not because I wanted to meet …show more content…
He instead tried to work out the problem we all have tried to solve in our minds. What makes a great president? This I believe was designed for us to take it a step further and to ask ourselves ‘Who of the four presidential candidates has the characteristics of a great president?’ I think this was an important topic because it causes us to think about specific characteristics instead of just the party system. It is quite easy to say Trump is the best candidate because he is Republican and that Clinton is the worst because she is a Democrat and vice versa, but I still people struggling to find specific attributes that they think would merit the presidency over another candidate. I was previously unaware of these specific attributes that make a good president. Especially the opposition of ceremonial duties versus the governance ones. I really liked when he spoke of temperament which he translates to the perfect mix in Latin. I thought this highlighted what the president it, the perfect mix of generosity and connecting the American people while still being firm and have the ability to twist a few arms. Professor Stroff really helped me align more strongly to my candidate of choice because I see now that they have the high emotional intelligence and temperament needed to keep moving this country forwards. Neither of the candidates might have those specific …show more content…
The first speaker Director Updegrove helped me understand how fragile and easy swayed the electoral system is, and how important my vote can actually be. He helped me realize how wrong it is for my generation to take for granted the right to vote which countless people fought relentlessly for me to able to have a voice in the government. The second speaker Professor Albertson made me realize how modern day politicians are trying to influence us by creating an environment of political anxiety. I now know what to look for and how to look at things with a little bit more of a clearer perspective when taking in political ads. And the last speaker Professor Stroff helped me understand what makes a good president and how to evaluate a candidate better instead of relying to a specific political party. As Director Updegrove said “democracy is the last best hope on earth” but it still comes with it’s faults. Election on local, state, and federal level are all ways for us to make our voices
The first speaker Mark Updegrove opened with an anecdote about meeting a freshman Congressman in his junior year in high school. He spoke of being in awe of meeting this Congressman and asked how many of us want to meet our Congressman. I awkwardly raised my hand not because I wanted to meet …show more content…
He instead tried to work out the problem we all have tried to solve in our minds. What makes a great president? This I believe was designed for us to take it a step further and to ask ourselves ‘Who of the four presidential candidates has the characteristics of a great president?’ I think this was an important topic because it causes us to think about specific characteristics instead of just the party system. It is quite easy to say Trump is the best candidate because he is Republican and that Clinton is the worst because she is a Democrat and vice versa, but I still people struggling to find specific attributes that they think would merit the presidency over another candidate. I was previously unaware of these specific attributes that make a good president. Especially the opposition of ceremonial duties versus the governance ones. I really liked when he spoke of temperament which he translates to the perfect mix in Latin. I thought this highlighted what the president it, the perfect mix of generosity and connecting the American people while still being firm and have the ability to twist a few arms. Professor Stroff really helped me align more strongly to my candidate of choice because I see now that they have the high emotional intelligence and temperament needed to keep moving this country forwards. Neither of the candidates might have those specific …show more content…
The first speaker Director Updegrove helped me understand how fragile and easy swayed the electoral system is, and how important my vote can actually be. He helped me realize how wrong it is for my generation to take for granted the right to vote which countless people fought relentlessly for me to able to have a voice in the government. The second speaker Professor Albertson made me realize how modern day politicians are trying to influence us by creating an environment of political anxiety. I now know what to look for and how to look at things with a little bit more of a clearer perspective when taking in political ads. And the last speaker Professor Stroff helped me understand what makes a good president and how to evaluate a candidate better instead of relying to a specific political party. As Director Updegrove said “democracy is the last best hope on earth” but it still comes with it’s faults. Election on local, state, and federal level are all ways for us to make our voices