GlassBooth

“Always vote for principle. Though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” — John Quincy Adams

Glassbooth has teamed up with The League of Young Voters on the release of their new Facebook application.

The application is rather cool. Tell the app which issues you care about, what candidate you support, and why. It will then process a virtual badge to wear on your profile, letting your friends know where you stand politically.

Some Wired love for Glassbooth.

What, you might say, are the primaries all about? Why are they all people seem to be talking about? What is a caucus? And what is so super about Super Tuesday?

Well here at Glassbooth our crack team of researchers has put together some answers for you.

What is a primary?

A state election where citizens vote to determine which candidates for president (for each party) will be supported by that state at the national convention of each party.

What is a caucus?

Rather than going to polls, citizens get together in groups (at schools, churches, gymnasiums, etc) to elect local delegates. Local delegates then later caucus together to elect national delegates. Depending on what caucus they are at, voters can cast a secret ballot, stand in their respective corner, or raise their hand to indicate who they want to represent them at the county – and in turn, national – convention of that party.

Why are the caucuses and primaries so important?

Simply put, the winners get their party’s nomination to run for president. That being said, a few primaries and caucuses receive more attention than others. The Iowa caucuses, New Hampshire primary, and South Carolina primary have been the constant focus of reporters for months now, mostly due to the early date that they occur.

What is “Super Tuesday”?

“Super Tuesday” is a Tuesday early each year (this year it is Feb. 5th), when numerous states simultaneously hold their primaries. This year, there are 24 states involved in Super Tuesday. With so many states determining whom their delegates will support on Super Tuesday, it is critical for any politician with aspirations of getting their party’s nomination for president to do very well on this day.

Are there any fun facts about the primaries that will make my friends believe I am very knowledgeable, and will serve as good holiday party fodder?

Yes, yes there are.

1. In 1972, Iowa became the earliest primary/caucus when it moved its date to January 3rd each year (that is TODAY!!). The previous “early primary champion” was New Hampshire, which occurs on January 8th each year.

2. Since 1980, every winner of the South Carolina Republican primary has won the party’s nomination.

3. This year there are 24 states involved in Super Tuesday, a new record. The previous record was 16 states, which occurred on March 7, 2000.

4. With only two exceptions (Pat Buchanan & John McCain), win the New Hampshire primary and you’re going to get the Republican nomination. At least this has been the case since 1968.

Should I vote in my state’s primary? Does it even matter?

Yes, yes, and yes again. The primary season is when voters are given the most options to choose from in determining whom they will vote for – we think of it as the candidate buffet (and who doesn’t love a buffet). The environment is your issue? Vote for the candidate who is strongest on it. Gun Control? Same thing. No matter the “what” or “why” of who you want to get your party’s nomination, the primaries represent your chance to determine who that person is. So head to your school, library, church or wherever you vote in your state and cast your ballot. Never will your one vote mean so much again (at least not until 2012).

Check out this site to see when your state’s primary is!

Want to see where the candidates stand on the issues?

Check out the new Glassbooth YouTube channel.

Happy New Years,
The Glassbooth Team

A little holiday gift from the Glassbooth team.

We have now added a permalink function.

When you finish the quiz and find out how you compare with the candidates, look at the URL…that’s a link to your personal results.

Cut and paste the URL and send it to friends or post it on your blog.

Happy Holidays,
Glassbooth

It takes a different perspective. Next time you are watching or reading a story about the election, ask yourself, “what is this really about?” Do it often enough and you will not only be a person that talks to yourself, but you will realize that the vast majority of election coverage has nothing to do with the issues and everything to do with who is winning, who is losing, and what political tactics are being employed.

To sum it up Kat Seelye (who was nice enough to give Glassbooth a shout out) breaks down a 2007 co-study by The Project for Excellence in Journalism and the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at the Kennedy School at Harvard. The findings reveal a media obsessed with the horse race, and unconcerned with the issues. A few select gems:

- Almost two thirds of all stories (print, television, radio and online combined) focused on the political aspects of the campaign, while only one percent focused on the candidates’ public records.

- Only 12 percent of stories were considered relevant to voters’ decision-making; the rest were inside baseball, more relevant to the candidates and operatives.

- The campaign coverage has been sharply at odds with what the public says it wants, the study found, with voters eager to know more about the candidates’ positions on issues and their personal backgrounds, more about lesser-known candidates and more about the debates.

And so on.

With trends in election coverage like these on the rise since the television press, it is with moments of reflection and study provided here that we can ask “why?” and “to what effect?” By far the easiest way to access the candidates is through the media, so what does it mean when the media avoids the issues? At Glassbooth we are remixing this affair. While the issue-based coverage is sparse, we have spent the last months finding it, compiling it, and delivering it in a fair way. There is a void here and we are playing our part in filling it. Enjoy.

It’s not a question of whether we care about the candidates’ personalities - it’s a question of whether we should.

Stanley Fish posted this on his New York Times blog this morning - an idea that will hopefully stir some debate about the above predicament.

Apparently CBS News will be quizzing the candidates about their personal beliefs, and apparently Stanley Fish doesn’t like it:

“Katie Couric is now asking the presidential candidates 10 questions designed (declares the CBS News Web site) to ‘go beyond politics and show what really makes them tick.’

“Already I’m suspicious.

“Why, when the office the candidates seek is a pre-eminently political one, does it make sense to go ‘beyond politics’? (It is as if you were looking for an office manager and decided to go ‘beyond organizational skills’ by inquiring into the applicants’ tastes in books or music.)

“Beyond politics means beyond policies. Rather than asking, ‘Would you favor a flat tax rate?’ or ‘Do you propose to provide universal health coverage, and if so, how?’…Couric will ask, ‘When was the last time you lost your temper.’

“…Integrity — the quality of standing up for the same values in every situation no matter whom you’re speaking to — is probably not a qualification for navigating the treacherous and ever-shifting waters of domestic and international diplomacy…And if character were really everything, candidates would be judged by their relationships with family and friends (Abraham Lincoln, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton might not fare too well if that were the measure) rather than by their ability first to recognize, and then to deal with, the many problems facing the nation.”

With the question in 2004 of “moral values” being the most important “issue” for voters, and already an investment this election cycle in values debates - Fish asks, “Do you start with the inner landscape of the individual and project outward to his or her performance in office, or do you leave the inner weather of the candidates’ spiritual and psychological health to their therapists and pastors?”

This type of philosophical argument is rarely discussed. It is time to reflect deeply into ourselves and the ideas that exist in the political environment to ask the question: what makes the best president and how does that effect my one vote?

Please visit our friends at TechCrunch and nominate Glassbooth for “Most Likely to Make the World a Better Place.”

It’s time to look inwards.

What would it feel like to carry a great misconception about where the presidential candidates stand? Would you feel doubt? Would it feel any different than knowing the truth?

We know that we don’t know everything about the candidates - there is simply not enough time. So we infer. We make educated guesses. We act on hunches. The process pulls us further and further from our political reality and has the power to sway entire elections.

In 2004, John Tierney of the New York Times wrote, “It’s one week to the election. Do you know where your candidate is?” He continues the editorial by outlining the current political information environment - where we often completely and unknowingly contradict our beliefs when voting for candidates who we don’t agree with.

That same year, the National Annenberg Election Survey found that only half of respondents could typically identify where Bush or Kerry stood on the major issues. What the survey doesn’t reveal is whether we are aware that there is anything is wrong with this picture.

How can we know when our facts are not the reality?

Of course, the answer and responsibility lies in staying connected to the truth. I have learned that one of the hardest things to do in life is admit you are wrong. It is time to let go of what we think we know, and begin to learn with an open-mind. Trust me, after having spent months researching the candidates for this project, there are surprises in here…even for the most astute political junkie.