I strongly agree with this article that social media has had a major impact on the popularity of the presidential candidates and it definitely has the power to sway opinions. I believe a trend has been set that in order to be efficient in gaining supporters and sharing political views, the candidates must be “technologically savvy.” I also agree with the article that the candidates must be mentally tough and quick responders in order to endure the intense media scrutiny. Considering the presidents deals with issues mostly on national or international levels, it seems to make sense that senators, who have that type of experience, are more appealing for that position over governors, who have more experience with state-level issues.
In the upcoming election, candidates have had to conform to society and its rapid use of technology and social media. Candidates using social media gives them an undeniable advantage in the election. For example, they become “media savvy”, a trait that is desirable to a number of young candidates. It also gives them other advantages. Candidates can see the ways other candidates are using their social media and what they are posting. For example, candidates must observe Donald Trump and the unique way he is using his Twitter account, often times using it to bash other candidates. No matter what you believe, social media has changed the entire election, but if used correctly can be used to the advantage of the candidate.
I fully agree with this article stating that social media plays a key role in elections. With social media, news travels within seconds. Candidates can use this as an advantage to their campaign, however, social media can lead to a downfall in their campaign as well. As expressed in the article, if a candidate makes a mistake such as saying the wrong statement, millions of people will know within an hour. With that being said, candidates can also use social media as an advantage. They can use social media to become more personal by tweeting their own words or posting a picture on Instagram of themselves. By doing this, the candidates seem more real, not just someone you see on the TV.
This article is an accurate description of how social media plays a role in the 2016 election. Because each candidate has multiple social media accounts there opinions spread rapidly. For the most part it is good. Candidates can see other candidates news, speeches, and opinions faster and can easily debate over social media. But social media has not always been taken seriously with the candidates. Candidates become to comfortable and say obscure things that they don't think through before posting. It's not just their tweets or pictures but also their appearances on television such as talk shows. Hillary Clinton made a fool of herself on the Tonight Show because she was being careless with her appearance. I think it is important that candidates that are running to become president of the United States need to be more careful and serious on social media in order to uphold their political appearance.
Although social media does play a significant role in elections, this article also highlights of a candidate’s background and perspective. Often times, governors are not as successful in the presidential race since they do not typically have to address national issues. The national spotlight can prove too much for them to handle especially for those who have only had experience in their own respective state. Additionally, when it comes to making blunders, the national media plays a much greater role for the campaign. Governors are used to their mistakes being forgotten in a few short days when they are campaigning for office, but on a national stage, small mistakes can prove to be game changers. National media will heighten the significance of the mistake and draw negative attention to the candidate. For many, the pressure from the press and the scrutiny of their every action proves to be unmanageable. Unlike in previous times, presidential candidates today must have sweeping knowledge on national issues or else the media can destroy their campaign.
I completely agree that about how this article speaks about the importance of social media. The popularity of candidates can easily be seen using social media platforms and can provide many insights about the types of people who each candidate is appealing to. I also agree with Kelli that candidates must be technologically savvy to be able to manipulate the world of social media into liking them. Candidates who are able to work social media and say things that attracts certain groups will become more popular in elections. The opposite is true too, however, because not being able to use social media will prove to be a major downfall especially as our world becomes more technologically advanced. Candidates should put a large importance on social media and learn the ways to gain respect on these platforms.
Social media has changed the whole persidental election. It has caused conflict and debate throughout the nation.Social media draws attention to negative aspects of candidates and draws attention to their mistakes and flaws. Also, many candidates like trump, use social media such as twitter to bad mouth other candidates. This is very immature and unprofessional and social media is allowing the whole world to see this about trump. Although, candidates can use social media to their advantage. When they become more involved with social media it allows younger voters to get more involved and want to get more involved with politics. Therefore, social media plays a big role in the elections, in both positive and negative ways.
Social media has made a huge impact on the way campaigns are run. As I observe the GOP candidates in this presidential election, I notice that the only candidates elevating in the polls are those with a strong media presence and a notable background. For example, billionaire Donald Trump is nationally known. Without his celebrity status, he would be nowhere in this race. Former candidates, Rick Perry and Scott Walker, did not have an influencial media presence. If you asked an ordinary person who those people were, they would probably have no idea. This greatly hurt their chances of staying in the race.
I strongly agree with this article that social media has had a major impact on the popularity of the presidential candidates and that it has the power to sway opinions. Social media draws attention to negative aspects of candidates and draws attention to mistake and flaws. Social media is also used by the candidates themselves. Trump, for example, is a "celebrity" billionaire, and without that status he would be nowhere in this race. He has an influence in social media . Trump uses social media to his advantage but also bad mouths other candidates which allows the whole world to see how immature and unprofessional he really is. Social media allows younger voters to be more involved and informed. If you asked random people who Rick Perry and Scott Walker were a majority of people would not know who they were, mainly because their lack of social popularity. Social media greatly affects the race.
As the article and everyone above has said, social media has had a tremendous impact on this election. Many young voters keep updated by posts on Twitter and other websites. The candidates can use the media to portray their beliefs to an audience they might not otherwise be able to reach. The downside to this is that the candidates can also use this as a resource to draw negativity to their opponents, such as Trump did. Social media is to today's society as the radio was to the twenties and thirties. This also can be compared to the first presidential debate on television. Prior to the debate, Nixon seemed to be pulling ahead of Kennedy in the election. Nixon sounded confident and prepared on the radio but when it came time for the debate, he appeared to be extremely nervous in comparison to Kennedy. This gave Kennedy the advantage for the rest of the campaign. Candidates today should make sure to clearly think out everything they post on social media. If they slip up and make a mistake, it will be reshared thousands of times. I feel that this resource is a great way to reach people who do not watch the debates on tv and do not research the candidates thouroughly.
As the election moves closer, the president that contenders must conform to technology and social media is being set. As the article pointed out, mistakes and news moves fast. Candidates must be on there feet and use it to there advantage as well as realize that mistakes make a much bigger impact that in past elections. A national story can be about a mistake made in a small town in Idaho, so every interaction with voters matters. So it makes sense that Senators have the upper hand when it comes to reporters and topics on a national scale. Governors don't have the luxury or a slip up or a delayed response. I am interested to find out if in the end, a Senator trumps a state Governor.
It’s easy to see that technology and social media is making a huge impact on this upcoming election. Social media allows news to travel rapidly throughout the country and keeps everyone updated on what’s going on. In order for any of the candidates to succeed, they have to learn how to use it to their advantage. If used correctly, social media can greatly help improve voters’ opinions of the candidates. This is especially true of younger people who are more present on social media; candidates can try to appeal to them by talking on social media and gaining more of a presence in general. Even so, social media can also be their downfall. If candidates make any mistakes, the mistakes are blown up and spread all over the country. It makes sense that Senators would be better than a governor at dealing with this, and I think it’ll be interesting to see how much of an effect social media does have on the election in the end.
I definitely agree with this article that social media and technology have been a big part of the presidential election. Yes, in 2015 social media is a big part in how we connect with the world, so do think that it is kind of wise they way they thought of it. I also think for whoever has decided to use social media had to have been aware of how it works, with both support, as well as opposition to their ideas. Going off of what Maren said, when you’re able to look at the other candidates’ flaws on social media and work off of them, then there will be success. It just depends on how the candidates utilize what they have and how well they can connect with potential voters.
I strongly agree with this article that social media has had a major impact on the popularity of the presidential candidates and it definitely has the power to sway opinions. I believe a trend has been set that in order to be efficient in gaining supporters and sharing political views, the candidates must be “technologically savvy.” I also agree with the article that the candidates must be mentally tough and quick responders in order to endure the intense media scrutiny. Considering the presidents deals with issues mostly on national or international levels, it seems to make sense that senators, who have that type of experience, are more appealing for that position over governors, who have more experience with state-level issues.
ReplyDeleteIn the upcoming election, candidates have had to conform to society and its rapid use of technology and social media. Candidates using social media gives them an undeniable advantage in the election. For example, they become “media savvy”, a trait that is desirable to a number of young candidates. It also gives them other advantages. Candidates can see the ways other candidates are using their social media and what they are posting. For example, candidates must observe Donald Trump and the unique way he is using his Twitter account, often times using it to bash other candidates. No matter what you believe, social media has changed the entire election, but if used correctly can be used to the advantage of the candidate.
ReplyDeletewell-written! Work your hardest in APGoV
DeleteI fully agree with this article stating that social media plays a key role in elections. With social media, news travels within seconds. Candidates can use this as an advantage to their campaign, however, social media can lead to a downfall in their campaign as well. As expressed in the article, if a candidate makes a mistake such as saying the wrong statement, millions of people will know within an hour. With that being said, candidates can also use social media as an advantage. They can use social media to become more personal by tweeting their own words or posting a picture on Instagram of themselves. By doing this, the candidates seem more real, not just someone you see on the TV.
ReplyDeleteThis article is an accurate description of how social media plays a role in the 2016 election. Because each candidate has multiple social media accounts there opinions spread rapidly. For the most part it is good. Candidates can see other candidates news, speeches, and opinions faster and can easily debate over social media. But social media has not always been taken seriously with the candidates. Candidates become to comfortable and say obscure things that they don't think through before posting. It's not just their tweets or pictures but also their appearances on television such as talk shows. Hillary Clinton made a fool of herself on the Tonight Show because she was being careless with her appearance. I think it is important that candidates that are running to become president of the United States need to be more careful and serious on social media in order to uphold their political appearance.
ReplyDeleteArticulate, thoughtful response
DeleteAlthough social media does play a significant role in elections, this article also highlights of a candidate’s background and perspective. Often times, governors are not as successful in the presidential race since they do not typically have to address national issues. The national spotlight can prove too much for them to handle especially for those who have only had experience in their own respective state. Additionally, when it comes to making blunders, the national media plays a much greater role for the campaign. Governors are used to their mistakes being forgotten in a few short days when they are campaigning for office, but on a national stage, small mistakes can prove to be game changers. National media will heighten the significance of the mistake and draw negative attention to the candidate. For many, the pressure from the press and the scrutiny of their every action proves to be unmanageable. Unlike in previous times, presidential candidates today must have sweeping knowledge on national issues or else the media can destroy their campaign.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree that about how this article speaks about the importance of social media. The popularity of candidates can easily be seen using social media platforms and can provide many insights about the types of people who each candidate is appealing to. I also agree with Kelli that candidates must be technologically savvy to be able to manipulate the world of social media into liking them. Candidates who are able to work social media and say things that attracts certain groups will become more popular in elections. The opposite is true too, however, because not being able to use social media will prove to be a major downfall especially as our world becomes more technologically advanced. Candidates should put a large importance on social media and learn the ways to gain respect on these platforms.
ReplyDeleteSocial media has changed the whole persidental election. It has caused conflict and debate throughout the nation.Social media draws attention to negative aspects of candidates and draws attention to their mistakes and flaws. Also, many candidates like trump, use social media such as twitter to bad mouth other candidates. This is very immature and unprofessional and social media is allowing the whole world to see this about trump. Although, candidates can use social media to their advantage. When they become more involved with social media it allows younger voters to get more involved and want to get more involved with politics. Therefore, social media plays a big role in the elections, in both positive and negative ways.
ReplyDeleteSocial media has made a huge impact on the way campaigns are run. As I observe the GOP candidates in this presidential election, I notice that the only candidates elevating in the polls are those with a strong media presence and a notable background. For example, billionaire Donald Trump is nationally known. Without his celebrity status, he would be nowhere in this race. Former candidates, Rick Perry and Scott Walker, did not have an influencial media presence. If you asked an ordinary person who those people were, they would probably have no idea. This greatly hurt their chances of staying in the race.
ReplyDeleteI strongly agree with this article that social media has had a major impact on the popularity of the presidential candidates and that it has the power to sway opinions. Social media draws attention to negative aspects of candidates and draws attention to mistake and flaws. Social media is also used by the candidates themselves. Trump, for example, is a "celebrity" billionaire, and without that status he would be nowhere in this race. He has an influence in social media . Trump uses social media to his advantage but also bad mouths other candidates which allows the whole world to see how immature and unprofessional he really is. Social media allows younger voters to be more involved and informed. If you asked random people who Rick Perry and Scott Walker were a majority of people would not know who they were, mainly because their lack of social popularity. Social media greatly affects the race.
ReplyDeleteAs the article and everyone above has said, social media has had a tremendous impact on this election. Many young voters keep updated by posts on Twitter and other websites. The candidates can use the media to portray their beliefs to an audience they might not otherwise be able to reach. The downside to this is that the candidates can also use this as a resource to draw negativity to their opponents, such as Trump did. Social media is to today's society as the radio was to the twenties and thirties. This also can be compared to the first presidential debate on television. Prior to the debate, Nixon seemed to be pulling ahead of Kennedy in the election. Nixon sounded confident and prepared on the radio but when it came time for the debate, he appeared to be extremely nervous in comparison to Kennedy. This gave Kennedy the advantage for the rest of the campaign. Candidates today should make sure to clearly think out everything they post on social media. If they slip up and make a mistake, it will be reshared thousands of times. I feel that this resource is a great way to reach people who do not watch the debates on tv and do not research the candidates thouroughly.
ReplyDeleteAs the election moves closer, the president that contenders must conform to technology and social media is being set. As the article pointed out, mistakes and news moves fast. Candidates must be on there feet and use it to there advantage as well as realize that mistakes make a much bigger impact that in past elections. A national story can be about a mistake made in a small town in Idaho, so every interaction with voters matters. So it makes sense that Senators have the upper hand when it comes to reporters and topics on a national scale. Governors don't have the luxury or a slip up or a delayed response. I am interested to find out if in the end, a Senator trumps a state Governor.
ReplyDeleteIt’s easy to see that technology and social media is making a huge impact on this upcoming election. Social media allows news to travel rapidly throughout the country and keeps everyone updated on what’s going on. In order for any of the candidates to succeed, they have to learn how to use it to their advantage. If used correctly, social media can greatly help improve voters’ opinions of the candidates. This is especially true of younger people who are more present on social media; candidates can try to appeal to them by talking on social media and gaining more of a presence in general. Even so, social media can also be their downfall. If candidates make any mistakes, the mistakes are blown up and spread all over the country. It makes sense that Senators would be better than a governor at dealing with this, and I think it’ll be interesting to see how much of an effect social media does have on the election in the end.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with this article that social media and technology have been a big part of the presidential election. Yes, in 2015 social media is a big part in how we connect with the world, so do think that it is kind of wise they way they thought of it. I also think for whoever has decided to use social media had to have been aware of how it works, with both support, as well as opposition to their ideas. Going off of what Maren said, when you’re able to look at the other candidates’ flaws on social media and work off of them, then there will be success. It just depends on how the candidates utilize what they have and how well they can connect with potential voters.
ReplyDelete