Presidential Campaign

Presidential debates are known to be little more than televised political theater, and that’s in part why we watch them. However, perhaps at no point would it have been more important for both candidates to skip the theatrics than during this debate cycle - at a time when rising energy prices are leaving a dent in Americans’ wallets already strained by an economy that has been lagging for months.

With the debate season closed and the presidential election near, some commentators have noted the silence from the candidates on issues such as poverty and the war in Afghanistan. Yet, it has gone largely unnoticed that, in the 2012 presidential debates, the word ‘rape’ was never used. Not once. In the only vice presidential debate of 2012, the word ‘rape’ was mentioned, yet only within the context of reproductive rights.

The Nevadan Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) vote is, and will be, the margin of victory in this year's presidential election and the critical vote to re-elect President Obama and move this country forward.

AAPIs of the Silver State are a microcosm of the colors and energy of this country. Even as AAPIs grew the fastest out of all ethnicities -- growing 46 percent from 2000 to 2010 nationally -- Nevada's AAPI community grew at an astounding rate of 116 percent and now comprises 9 percent of the state. Despite our community's impressive growth, however, only 55 percent of AAPIs are registered to vote nationally and one-third of AAPI voters remain undecided.

Monday night’s foreign policy debate was supposed to provide a contrast between two competing visions about America’s role in the world, the path forward in the Middle East, and the 21st century threats over the horizon. 

At the core of the debate was the question of American policy towards Iran – a country mentioned 40 times by both candidates – with an entire segment devoted to discussing “Redlines - Israel and Iran.” This topic - so hotly debated in Washington, Jerusalem, and at the United Nations General Assembly over the past several months - was designed to clarify the differences between Governor Romney and President Obama on their vision for handling the thorniest foreign policy issue of the day.

Missing from Governor Romney’s campaign promises for cuts is needed moral reflection on the future of Medicaid. He plans steep reductions to Medicaid’s with no weighing of the consequences for human life.  Of all the cuts that Romney proposes, what he would do to Medicaid is the cruelest and it would hit Americans hard.

The extraordinary disconnect of Governor Romney’s opening position in the final presidential debate almost went unnoticed as he tried to distance himself from some of his previous foreign policy statements.

As a Palestinian-American, I awaited the presidential debate on foreign policy with anticipation, given the massive U.S. military footprint in the region of my birth.
 
I confess to being torn in my attitude to the candidates. From a Palestinian perspective, I know there is little difference: Neither would take effective steps to end Israel’s 45-year occupation, challenge its illegal building of settlements, or shake its draconian hold on Jerusalem.

Despite efforts by both parties to paint President Obama and Governor Romney as opposites, there is at least one policy area they agree on — the need to bolster our education system and expand the use of charter schools.

Teachers unions and their allies object to this concept, arguing that expanding student choice takes money away from (and thus weakens) traditional public schools. Opponents also question whether charter schools have the capacity to outperform their traditional counterparts. By examining Ohio’s charter school experience, we’re able to compare the performance of charter schools relative to their public counterparts.

Recent weeks have brought a rash of reports of something that used to be unthinkable in America: employers telling their workers who to vote for.
 
First, Republican billionaire and Westgate Resorts CEO David Siegel informed his 8,000 employees that “another 4 years of the same presidential administration” would “threaten your job.” Then, Koch Industries wrote its 45,000 employees that “if we elect candidates who … put unprecedented regulatory burdens on businesses,” employees “may suffer the consequences.”

The Obama-Biden team continues to insist that Romney’s plan to cut tax rates and cap deductions would reduce federal revenue by $5 trillion over ten years. Where did that number come from?