New Techniques in Political Research

The telephone call out method of political research is the dinosaur of our times. Like the dinosaur, everyone keeps talking about it as if it was still alive. Museums will someday display call centers with voice samples of the traditional political call. Sadly, many politicians and special interest groups still believe these old world methods are effective.

A few obvious reasons the traditional polls are failing to perform are the advent of Caller ID, the massive use of the “Do Not Call” lists, the common (most cases it is now free) option to not list a new phone number when ordering service and the biggest factor no one wants to admit, the shit from land lines to cell lines as the ONLY phone in a residence. Cell numbers are not listed anywhere. The number of “cell phone only” voters will grow to over ten percent this year and continue to rise. Wow, so what data are you using to make critical decisions?

I know you want to believe the old methods work. You want to trust. But in your heart, you know something isn’t right. It is time for new research methods.

While voters have shifted their telephone habits, they have also started a new habit of Internet use. The political blogs, newspapers, interaction via Internet during news and town hall televised events and now the podcasts have America located in a different place. In case you have any questions relating to where by as well as tips on how to employ Abraham Lincoln Songs, you are able to contact us with the page. They have moved. Has your research company moved with them?

Research firms who have evolved with the times employ techniques including web cam interviews while conducting political research. Better than a phone call, this confirms who is being surveyed; this approach also enables the client to see a picture of all who have been survey. It is amazing how putting a face with the data spawns a different creative insight than traditional research results. The new age of political research has arrived. It is an exciting time for creative companies. It is not so good to be the dinosaur.

Political Campaign Songs Part 2

One of the truly wonderful things about the political campaign season is the amazing amount of political entertainment that comes about. This includes commercials, giant rallies and the focus of this article, political campaign songs.

During this particular campaign season everything seems magnified by the presence of candidate Trump, especially when it comes to campaign songs. A couple of dust-ups occurred when the Trump campaign used one of Neil Young's songs at some campaign rallies. Apparently Young took some exception to that and asked Trump to stop. Next Steven Tyler got into the act by asking Trump to not use Arrowsmith's song, "Dream On," which seemed to be more of a theme song since it wasn't really written for the campaign. After that mini tempest Trump has decided to use glam band Twisted Sisters song, "We're Not Gonna Take It."

But there are plenty of unofficial Trump songs; Mac Miller comes to mind. Trump himself did not really endorse the song as the lyrics are pretty crude, however Trump did voice his opinion that the song only had 30 million views on YouTube, which was apparently below The Donald's standard. No sooner had Team Trump uttered those words than the view total climbed over one hundred million, thus getting into an area that can share The Donald's rarefied air. But other humbler Trump songs that are very excellent and are not in the least vulgar are out there such as the "Mr. Trump Song." When you loved this informative article in addition to you would like to acquire more details with regards to Abraham Lincoln Songs i implore you to go to the website.
 
While Trump mixes theme style songs with songs actually written about him other candidates generally stick to theme style songs for their campaigns. The most memorable is probably Franklin Delano Roosevelt's 1932 campaign theme song, "Happy Days Are Here Again." Harry Truman used "I'm Just Wild About Harry," which was actually written in 1921 for a Broadway Musical. 

But the campaign songs that are best are the songs that actually name the candidate and are no longer theme type songs. The first and best of these types of efforts has to be Frank Sinatra's John F. Kennedy's 1960 campaign song in which the Sinatra reworked the lyrics to "High Hopes" by sticking Kennedy's name in it. It was a lark, but with that amazing big band behind Sinatra's voice, well it sounded fantastic! The song had all the vitality and fun that we associate with the Kennedy campaign and presidency. Sinatra seemed to have done the impossible combining politics with pop music without sounding cornball.

Lyndon Johnson tried to follow in the footsteps of the Kennedy song by having Ed Ames rework the "Hello Dolly" song by Louis Armstrong into "Hello Lyndon." This rendition was not very good, very cornball, and unfortunate in the light of LBJ's failed presidency.

This brings up to some better attempts in recent years at political song writing, most notably John Lennon's "Come Together," which he started to write for Timothy Leary's gubernatorial campaign in California. That effort came to an end when Leary was arrested, however John Lennon was able to rework Come Together into a great hit for his band The Beatles, which came out on the hugely successful album Abbey Road. Maybe in the end Trump has found the right mixture of theme style campaign songs, original songs, and goofy songs. However the election turns out, the campaign music circus will be missed.

Immigration Issues are Hot Topics with the Presidential Campaigns

With the presidential campaigns beginning to heat up and the caucuses starting in January, immigration is a hot topic. It is the fourth most common keyword searched at the New York Times online this week behind bush, china, and iraq. Every candidate debate has questions ask on the candidate's position on immigration. The discussion will only get more heated for the next year leading up to the election in November of 2008.

Most of the discussion involves controlling the Mexican border and what to do with the millions of undocumented immigrants already in the United States. The debate includes whether we should have a Mexican border fence, more border patrol agents, and of course forcing illegal immigrants already here to go home before they can return. All the candidates are weighing in with their plans and sometimes we forget that this issue has been around forever and involves more than just the Mexican border. If you liked this article and also you would like to receive more info relating to civil war music please visit our webpage.

Federal officials reported that they have arrested 30,000 people this fiscal year on charges of illegal border crossing. There are estimated to be 1600 state bills relating to immigration because of the fact that a federal bill has not passed Congress. There are daily reports of immigration rackets across the United States where people are attempting to profiteer on the problem.

The past seven years has been the highest period of immigration in American history according to the U. S. Census Bureau. It is a hot topic that is not going away and covers all aspects of American social and business concerns.

Is The Doctrine of Election Unfair and Unjust?

A common objection to the doctrine of Election taught by Calvinism is that election is completely unfair and unjust on the part of God to choose those who would be saved and leave the rest to be damned. A common argument is that God owes everyone a fair chance and it should be up to each individual as to whether or not they want to serve God or not. The problem with these accusations is that they ignore some fundamental teachings found within the Bible such as the idea of total depravity.

The doctrine of election is taught plainly in Romans chapter 9 as we read: "(for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), it was said to her, 'The older shall serve the younger.' As it is written, 'Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated." This passage teaches us that God chooses who will be saved not because of anything they have or have not done, but so that his purpose might stand.

Now we run into the argument that this idea of God choosing is not fair. This is answered in the very next verse as we read: "What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not! For He says to Moses, 'I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.' So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy." This once again affirms that it does not depend on what we do but rather on God Himself.

The idea that God owes everyone a chance is also refuted by scripture because scripture teaches us that men have already made their choice to reject God. We read in the first chapter of Romans that what can be known about God is made apparent by His creation, but men take this knowledge and suppress it in unrighteousness. Not only this, but the Bible tells us that we are saved by the Grace of God. Grace means unmerited favor. If you cherished this article and you would like to get more info relating to civil war music generously visit our own page. Therefore, to say that God "owes" anyone anything, namely a fair chance, is denying the very concept of Grace. Grace must be given freely by God to those whom he wishes, otherwise it is not Grace. Grace can not be demanded.

God could have done things in three ways. He could have saved everyone. He could have saved no one. Or he could have saved those whom he chose to save. In which of these ways is God free at all? He is not free if he has to save everyone, and he is not free if he can not save anyone. He is only free when he chooses to who lavish his grace upon. Unfortunately, most people today are more concerned about the freedom of man than the freedom of God.

The ultimate conclusion to this argument is that if God gave everyone what was really fair then everyone would perish and suffer eternal punishment because that is what everyone deserves. Therefore, it is only by the grace of God that we can be saved. In a certain way grace might be unfair, because it is not what we deserve. However, God is under no obligation to give His grace to every single person as this would surely strip Him of His freedom.

If The Doctrine of Election Is True Then Why Evangelize?

The doctrine of election states that God has an elect people whom he chose in Christ before the foundation of the world according to His purposes. If you loved this information and you would certainly like to get additional facts regarding Election songs kindly visit the web site. Election teaches that God has chosen who he will save from sin and therefore give undeserving grace. It also teaches that he has chosen who he will not give undeserving grace to but instead let them justly perish. It is a doctrine which is strongly based on the idea that God is totally free to do what He wishes with His creation.

Because the doctrine of election teaches that God has predestined a specific group of people to salvation, one of the most commonly asserted objections this doctrine is that if it is true then we have no reason or motivation to preach the gospel to the lost. After all, if God has predetermined who will be saved then it follows that no matter what we do or don't do they will still be saved. This argument is completely flawed in almost every aspect. It is very important that we remember that God has not only ordained the ends but also the means to those ends.

The above argument is assuming that the doctrine of election teaches fatalism, which is the idea that the ends are fixed and all of our actions have no affect on them. The doctrine of election does not teach fatalism, but instead teaches determinism. Determinism makes it clear that God has not only determined the ends but also everything that happens in between including the actions of men. God has commanded us to preach the gospel to all the earth because this is the means by which God saves men. God does not magically zap people with a bolt of lightning to save them, He uses the Holy Spirit and the Word of God.

In addition to this, the idea that God has an elect people should motivate us even more because we know for a fact that when we go to an area and preach the gospel that God has elect people all throughout the earth and people will be saved. We do not know who God's elect are, so we are commanded to preach to every man. God knows His elect and He will save all of those whom he has chosen in Christ. If there is no election and salvation is left up to the free will of man, what guarantee do we have that anyone will ever be saved by our preaching the word of God?

John Lennon and the Greatest Political Campaign Song Ever

John Lennon, one of the greatest song writers ever in one of the greatest bands ever, the Beatles, did in fact write the greatest political song ever penned by anyone. But Lennon has some pretty tough competition; that would be from the Chairman of the Board himself - Frank Sinatra. Yes the coolest of the cool, the head of the Rat Pack sang a great single in support of John Kennedy's successful 1960 campaign for President. The song was a rewording of the Sinatra's earlier hit "High Hopes" written by Jimmy Van Heusen with the lyrics by Sammy Cohn.

That was a great presidential campaign coming off some very good Eisenhower years and no matter who won the election the Americans knew that the good times would keep on rolling. Of course looking back we can see that the good times actually stopped for a period giving way to the strife of 1960's showing just how fast a cold bucket of political trouble in the form of The bay of Pigs, Vietnam, and assassination can change things. But for better or worse we can look back on the campaign itself with great and well deserved nostalgia, of which that song is a big part of. If you liked this short article and you would like to be given more details with regards to Election songs generously stop by the web-site.

Other campaigns have had some songs associated with them such as, "Happy Days are Hear Again" supporting Franklin Roosevelt's successful 1932 campaign and of course the venerable "The Hunters of Kentucky" as the theme song for Andrew Jackson's successful presidential bids in 1828 and '32. But Sinatra's Kennedy song actually names Kennedy so it seems so much better and authentic. There are a few songs in the current presidential campaign that also names candidates in their songs.

What Businesses Can Learn From Presidential Campaigns

Presidential elections are endurance contests and also the ultimate public relations battle. Indeed presidential campaigns sway public opinion in a way that nothing else does. One action by a candidate can brand that candidate forever in the public's mind and nothing will ever change it. Think back to such defining moments as Ronald Reagan's "there you go again"; Michael Dukakis lack of emotion when asked how he would respond if his wife was raped; and George H.W. Bush looking at his watch during a debate with Bill Clinton and Ross Perot.

This election cycle continues to show a very close election. At some point either Mitt Romney or Barack Obama will win the election. After the election we will all be looking back to see what was the defining moment. Was it the debates? The conventions? The economy? The attacks overseas? Regardless of what it was business executives can learn public relations lessons from presidential campaigns.

1. Events that you cannot control are a threat. Have a crisis plan in place to minimize their impact.

This election cycle we have already seen this come true. The Romney Campaign like everyone else was taken short by the events in Libya and Egypt. Compounding this was the candidate's response. People on both sides of the aisle have criticized Romney's attack on the Obama Administration coming on 9/11 when Romney just hours earlier had said the day was not one for attacks and negative campaigning. Romney's campaign which already was doing negative stories now has yet another news cycle. Another recent example was John McCain in 2008. His campaign was leading Obama in the polls until the Lehman collapse. McCain rather than addressing the issue and moving forward suspended his campaign. The result, both the economy and his campaign tanked.

Finally an example of failing to have a plan place that clearly affected an election and nearly cost a candidate the White House was George W. Bush's response to his drunken driving records released by a Maine lawyer the weekend before the election. Even though the Bush campaign was aware these records existed, they had no plan to deal with them if they were released. When the event happened, it reversed their momentum, alienated their base (social voters) who had been told that there were no such records, and made the candidate who was running as a man of integrity after the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal appear dishonest. Without a doubt, the scandal affected the outcome in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, and nearly changed the results in Florida. If you have any kind of concerns regarding where and exactly how to utilize Abraham Lincoln Songs, you could call us at our website.

2. When faced with an intense attack, a forceful response is needed but overreaction may cause more problems.

The Obama Campaign has pushed heavily against Mitt Romney and his tenure at Bain capital. With polls showing the attacks were taking a toll on Romney, he lined up interviews on every network to rebut the charges. Yet he covered no new ground and in some aspects appeared desperate and defensive rather than like a strong leader. Even Republicans acknowledged the Romney move backfired. Contrast this with Ronald Reagan in 1980 who was attacked of being a warmonger and racist by Democrats and President Carter. Reagan looking angry and determined said such charges had no place in political debate and Carter and Democrats owed the American people an apology. This reinforced Reagan's image of being determined and also one unruffled by attacks and turned the tables on Carter.

3. Images matter

We all remember in 2004, John Kerry vacationing and windsurfing. In a campaign where George W. Bush was campaigning as an everyman and was seen despite his policies as likeable, Kerry's image of windsurfing made him seem aloof. In 2000, Al Gore was seen as stiff and unemotional, so to shake things up he gave Tipper a kiss that rocked the convention and television viewers and gave them cause to reconsider their opinion of him (until the debates that is). Finally, in 1980s Americans were looking for strong forceful leadership and the presidency seemed too big for any person with our hostages in Iran, Ronald Reagan gave voters an image that endures of him. At the Nashua debate with George H.W. Bush, Reagan who was sponsoring the primary debate with Bush only, sought to include the other Republican contenders before the debate began the moderator told the sound technician to turn off Reagan's microphone. Reagan jumped up holding the microphone looking strong and angry said, "I am paying for this microphone." The debate, primary, and perhaps election were determined with that image.