GOVT

Respond to this post 1

Yes I think that differences among the President's top advisers should be aired in public. For the same reason that the President has top advisers having differences! Listening to all the different sides, all the different perspectives and from people of varied backgrounds and experience is a good thing.

I know that it could be frustrating to hear all the different viewpoints, form your own and then watch it go a different way. But then at least we could the pain staking process everyone went through before making the decision. I am much more likely to be supportive if I at least believe the intentions are good and the effort was real.

Having a difference of opinion is okay as long as everyone remains calm and respectful. Differences between the advisers should be seen as educational, improving everyone's perspective so that the best decision can be made. Quietly resolving issues behind the scenes is good for personal issues, or if the tensions are too high to control tempers. I wouldn't want to see people running our government acting like fools and creating drama. But if we can keep it productive, it would be good.

Respond to this post 2

Publishing poll results has been nothing new in government. As a matter of fact, with the establishment of the internet and easier accessibility to resources to use when deciding who to vote for, more people are taking to the polls and staying up to date with candidates' standings within an election. We mostly see this in major elections, such as the presidential elections; however, it still plays into a part for those who want to keep their decisions informed.

By publishing the poll results and standings before an election, there certainly may be a bias towards one candidate. This is both advantageous and a disadvantage to all candidates in the election. Therefore, the merit to the criticism that the "bandwagon effect" plays a factor into who wins an election is very real, and it is a tool that the leader of the poll can use to his or her advantage. When the bandwagon effect plays into whether or not a candidate has the lead, depending on popularity it can either boost or degrade his poll standings.

Lastly, if we were to give a hypothetical situation, say a candidate has the lead and you are torn between the leader and the candidate in second. If he has a large lead, are you going to be more or less inclined to vote for them, simply because they hold a drastic lead? Could it potentially discourage voters from participating in an election, strictly because they feel like their candidate simply doesn't have enough votes for you to make a difference?