Election Program Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Election Program - Case Study Example Any good candidate would. However Edwards is "is running for president to build One America" ( http://johnedwards.com/issues) and with an issued that is so likely to divide American, I think it would be a tough issue for him to decide one. And rightly so. The problems in American are huge. Especially with the buyer of the airport being from the Middle East, the situation becomes even more complex. There are still many Americans today who hold out racial hatred against any people from that region, and I can see already the protests coming from such people about selling over the airport to them. Especially sense the American concern for air security is already so high; I think many problems would come from the selling of the airport. However, the poll numbers show that 59 percent of people support the idea, and Edwards is a man of the people after all. In theory, it would be best for Edwards to support the idea on the campaign trail. This could work in his favor, as it would bring 59 percent of the public opinion under his belt, and it would work great for his every man image, and his idea of standing up to the old corrupt government as a person of the people. On Edward's own site is a quote about his ideas for the power of public government: ""With his One Democracy Initiative, Edwards has demonstrated that he will take on the dominance of corporate lobbyists to be the leader of something we lack today in Washington: a powerful 'lobby for the public good.' His vision for government reform, like many other issues, is charting a way to reclaim the soul and values of our party and of the country" ( http://johnedwards.com/issues/govt-reform), and his support of this plan would only straighten this platform of his. Problems further arise with the issue of this plan getting through the House and the Senate. If Edwards supports the plan and upsets his own party to much, he could loose the nomination. If he upsets the other side to much, he could find it very difficult to work with the House and the Senate if and when he becomes President. However, it would look really good to all the people of American if Edwards stood up to the House and the Senate on the platform that a majority of people support this bill, and that he did as well, further rallying his cause as a president for the people. Running for President, Edward also had to keep in mind the other half of Americans that don't support the idea as well. Maybe it wouldn't be the best bet for Edwards to come out and publicly support this idea, as it could cost him almost 50 percent of the popular vote on the election. And in a crucial election like this, every and any vote counts, and losing that much popular opinion might not work in his favor. It would be a tough decision for anyone to make, however I believe it would be in Edwards best interest to support the popular opinion and support the plan. This way, he can further build upon his platform as a people's man, and can also stand up to the government, which would really rally the people to his cause. It might upset some people on the other side however, and that is to be taken into consideration, but I feel that it would do more positive for his Presidential campaign that it would do to hurt it. It

A Jurors Perspective in the Case against Socrates Research Paper

A Jurors Perspective in the Case against Socrates - Research Paper Example Personally, I find nothing wrong with being inquisitive. Inquisitiveness has been the source of great knowledge for a long time. The fact that Socrates has been inquisitive, enquiring the earth and the clouds constitute no crime. If his chosen way of life does not harm anyone, and no one can confirm that he harmed anyone by being curious, then I find no fault at that. Of concern is the substance of which he enquires about. Contrary, Socrates has confessed to the things he enquires. He has said that he enquires about the presence and the nature of knowledge in selected persons. This, he has confessed, is to try to refute the claims of the Delphin oracle, which he claims elevates him as the wisest man in Athens. First, this raises the question of whether it is true that the oracle construed that he was the wisest man. If it is true, then such an important decree from the Athenian god Apollo should have been made known to all Athenians. The fact that this did not happen, is interpretabl e that the accused has put words in the mouth of a god. By claiming that the gods have recognized him as the wisest man, Socrates undermines the power of the Athenian gods by elevating himself as superhuman. He elevates himself to the level that he converses with the gods, though he is not a priest. In this issue, the accused is guilty of heresy and slander against the gods of Athena. His comparison of himself with Heracles is an insult to all Athenians and their integrity. It is an insult to the time-honored belief about the gods and the heroes of our history (Colaiaco 62). Second is the claim that he teaches his inquisitive lifestyle to others. In his defence, the accused has pointed out that he has never been a teacher. He does not take money from anyone in exchange for his perceived teachings. Therefore, if anyone goes to him, it is of his own accord. The teachings gained thereof that are one’s own desire. However, the place where the lessons are offered becomes very diff icult for the citizens of Athena to decide whether to attend or not. The accused has confessed of a tendency to start his teachings in public, where people gather for other purposes. This does not leave any choice to those in such areas, whether to listen or leave. This is so because there are in such places in pursuit of their own affair. Additionally, the accused has a tendency to stop people on the way and start questioning them. This constitutes a disruption of public peace. He propagates dissension and enmity among the people. If one is a teacher, he should let his students come to him on their own will. This is not in the interests of the state. The questioning of people regarding the level of wisdom is also demeaning. This is quite serious when it is considered that some of the subjects of the defendant’s questioning are citizens of high ranking. These people have made a significant contribution to the advancement of the nation. Branding these people as lacking wisdom and knowledge is a dishonor and a disparagement of their good work and sacrifices. On these charges, Socrates is guilty. The next charge brought against Socrates was the claim that he misguides the youth. His accusers have not explained what constitutes misguiding the youth. Using the little information provided to the court by the accusers, this is only interpretable to mean that the teaching of inquisitiveness taught by the accused to the public.