Berleson argues for a balance in informed voters and uninformed voters to keep the geopolitical landscape stable. He argues that there is a need for the uniformed voter which to me is a classist argument for the very fact that most that are politically unaware are people from low income. V.O argues the fact that politicians adapt to whatever their target audience wants to hear, from nonsense to nonsense, to delusion to delusion. I would agree with VO as the adaptability politicians use is what allows them to get elected as the mob mentality makes them funnel their vote into one candidate.
Berleson argue for a balance between both voters which are informed and uninformed. V.O says that Politicians go with whatever the people say so that they have a better chance. I would agree with V.O because he has a more accurate representation of whats happening compared to Berleson.
Berelson’s argument is that citizens should know what political stance they're taking when voting, while another group of citizens don't have to be as well informed in the political climate of their country. He argues this will balance out the voters. V.O argues that you must adapt in the geopolitical climate and agree and do what the voters want. Politicians must follow what they are saying in order to be a great representative. I agree with V.O argument because having a politician listening to the needs of the citizens is important in any government, especially now.
In my opinion I totally agree with Berleson's statements based off of what we have learn in the readings.Also, in class the graphs would show that many of democrats that would vote would most likely be people that are elderly or wealthy people, also people that were actually into politics.
Berleson argues for a balance in informed voters and uninformed voters to keep the geopolitical landscape stable. He argues that there is a need for the uniformed voter which to me is a classist argument for the very fact that most that are politically unaware are people from low income. V.O argues the fact that politicians adapt to whatever their target audience wants to hear, from nonsense to nonsense, to delusion to delusion. I would agree with VO as the adaptability politicians use is what allows them to get elected as the mob mentality makes them funnel their vote into one candidate.
ReplyDeleteBerleson argue for a balance between both voters which are informed and uninformed. V.O says that Politicians go with whatever the people say so that they have a better chance. I would agree with V.O because he has a more accurate representation of whats happening compared to Berleson.
ReplyDeleteBerelson’s argument is that citizens should know what political stance they're taking when voting, while another group of citizens don't have to be as well informed in the political climate of their country. He argues this will balance out the voters. V.O argues that you must adapt in the geopolitical climate and agree and do what the voters want. Politicians must follow what they are saying in order to be a great representative. I agree with V.O argument because having a politician listening to the needs of the citizens is important in any government, especially now.
ReplyDeleteLuisa Mallare
In my opinion I totally agree with Berleson's statements based off of what we have learn in the readings.Also, in class the graphs would show that many of democrats that would vote would most likely be people that are elderly or wealthy people, also people that were actually into politics.
ReplyDeleteEmmanuel Pimentel