So Far…. Do you say Barack Obama is failing or just getting warmed up?
February 9, 2010
|
Posted by Michael S. Langston
Over @ The Economist a little while back, they added a debate section. Every week or two, the pick an assertion others might find interesting, have a moderator, along with a pro & con, guest writers and voting tallies which change over time.
As you can imagine, finding interesting things to debate on a consistent basis isn’t the easiest thing, but some of the questions seem a little silly. For instance, Women: This house believes that women in the developed world have never had it so good.
The good news is that 64% of respondents can readily agree that women are better off now than they were 200 years ago. Conversely, the idea 36% of respondents are so singularly focused on an idea of equality that is impractical and impossible given that humans are different from each other.
I will begrudgingly admit, those in the “women don’t have it better” category are a little more nuanced, as they argue that they haven’t shared equally in the freedoms of men, therefore…. and here’s where I get lost, but apparently the conclusion is…. because of this we can plausibly argue against a simple statement that women have it better today than yesterday.
Either way, I’ve written about a couple of their debates on Chinese leadership with respect to the environment and the nanny states move to ban food.
The most recent debate however is very interesting and not because of the logically leaps some are making to defend their position. It’s interesting that the Economist, a pro-free market magazine, is hosting a debate which has their readership closely divided. The Motion:
Obama: This house believes that Barack Obama is failing.
I say interesting because while business magazines in general tend to lean conservative, the Economist endorsed both John Kerry & Barack Obama over their opponents. On Barack specifically, just four short months ago they wrote incorrectly in my opinion, how well Obama was doing with respect to foreign policy.
Secondarily, since 46% of their subscriber base is international (54% in North America), I would think the respondents tilt towards Obama would be more pronounced than it currently stands @ 46% agree Mr. Obama is failing, 54% disagree (rolling numbers so they could change).
Now to be fair, the Economist’s slant towards free market economics and pushes a lot of its news and analysis towards that. For this, they can be fairly called right leaning on most issues. It was pro-Iraq war, initially anyway, it’s free market stance made them endorse George Bush in 2000.
The respondents however seem to tend towards the liberal side, even though I think these facts point to the idea that their main base of membership probably lends conservative, at least economically so.
Irregardless – an interesting assertion is being debated – & with the pro-side written by David Boaz, Executive vice-president of the Cato Institute and the con-side written by Elaine Kamarck, Lecturer in Public Policy, Harvard Kennedy School of Government – very worthwhile reading as well.
Categories: Politics
| 
Tags: Critical Thinking, Obama Administration, Pass/Fail
|
Leave a reply
Do you plan to keep this site updated? I sure hope so… its great!