Published by El Nuevo Herald on Oct 16, 2015
Many argue that the debate between Republican presidential candidates far exceeded in television tuned to the recent Democratic debate.
It is indeed difficult to have such a colorful candidate as Donald Trump. Voters in both parties, independent immigrants, newcomers, women, gays and tourists lined up in front of public and private televisions to watch and listen as each new slapstick wielded by this individual.
You could say that Trump won the Republican debate, a fact that certainly corroborates his stay as the absolute leader in all polls.
His fiery words against illegal immigrants, its clear rejection to the use of the Spanish language in the US and its position in relation to women, generate precisely that effect on the harmony of the debate, as all expect to hear every time a new barbarism uttered by this billionaire.
For most viewers, Trump is a show in which many scoff or laugh. So it remains at the top of the polls, which of course is not the same as exercising the voting on election day.
The other Republican candidates, particularly Jeb Bush, ably appear to have dropped their guard; They wait for the epithets used by Trump or the speed reached crashing do wear out.
The Democratic debate also had a high estimated at more than 25 million people tuned. (Estimated just before real numbers)
Although to many young the winner was Bernie Sanders, the more focused balanced candidate, was certainly Hillary Clinton what makes her the real winner of the debate.
Hillary was cunningly defended by Sanders since her harassment has been for something as simple as her emails, when in the nation there are such serious problems as the paltry minimum wage and the continuous creation of American jobs overseas.
The former mayor of Baltimore and former Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley issued a speech anthology in his closing remarks. Clearly referring to Trump Republican debate and stressed that "there has not been spoken against immigrants, Hispanics or women"
US policy is an integral part of daily living. Hence the impact of the televised debates. Of course, the voters win when they have a chance to see the public positions of their candidates and their reactions when confronted.
Politicians win when they see the mistakes they made, which tries not to repeat in future discussions.
The parties win when polishing their candidates in every debate and make out the right message.
But those who actually earn more are TV channels who have the privilege to transmit the debates; indeed this prime time is highly prized by advertisers who pay exorbitant amounts to reach that segment of the population that is so important to their interests.
It turns out that most things are framed by an economic benefit. Whenever you come to power to dominate the economic base, which is the support of everything.
If you take the power under the cultural-ideological level (read feudal monarchs or religious lords), control of the economy is achieved.
If power is achieved through legal and political field (ie elections, coups and dictatorship), the ultimate aim is to manipulate financial resources.
In other words, the management of funds is usually what people sought, and certainly that's the nature of our system, so far the best known.Therefore, the discussions were, are and will always be a business.
And the ends have historically been negative in every respect. And both parties have their extremists, obviously. Do they have a chance to win the election? Probably not, according to the rule; However, every rule has its exception.
Benjamin F. DeYurre
Economist and Journalist.
Follow on Twitter: @DEYURRE
No comments:
Post a Comment