Ủng hộ ông Donald Trump, tờ báo ở chiến địa Pennsylvania phá lệ nửa thế kỷ

baothang99x

Senior Member
Tong-Thong-Donald-Tr.jpg


Ủng hộ ông Donald Trump, tờ báo nổi tiếng ở chiến địa Pennsylvania phá lệ ủng hộ ứng viên Cộng hòa sau gần nửa thế kỷ.

Một tờ báo ở một bang chiến trường quan trọng đã phá vỡ kỷ lục gần nửa thế kỷ ủng hộ Đảng Dân chủ để ủng hộ Tổng thống của Đảng Cộng hòa Donald Trump hôm 1.11.

Tờ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette cho biết, việc ủng hộ ông Donald Trump dựa trên hồ sơ kinh tế, thương mại và năng lượng của ông.

Tờ báo của bang chiến địa được đánh giá là sẽ định đoạt cuộc bầu cử Mỹ 2020 cũng ca ngợi quyết định của ông Donald Trump về bổ nhiệm các thẩm phán bảo thủ vào Tòa án Tối cao Mỹ.

Ban biên tập Pittsburgh Post-Gazette xuất bản một bài viết lập luận rằng, nhiệm kỳ tổng thống của ông Donald Trump sẽ mang lại nhiều lợi ích cho nước Mỹ hơn là một nhiệm kỳ dưới sự lãnh đạo của cựu Phó Tổng thống Joe Biden.

"Dưới thời ông Trump, các mối quan hệ thương mại của chúng ta đã được cải thiện đáng kể và các giao dịch thương mại của chúng ta đã được viết lại" - ban biên tập tờ báo nổi tiếng của Pennsylvania viết.

Ban biên tập của Pittsburgh Post-Gazette nhấn mạnh sự ủng hộ của tờ báo này cho việc ông Donald Trump ủng hộ nhiên liệu hóa thạch.

"Dưới thời ông Trump, Mỹ đã, lần đầu tiên trong cuộc đời của hầu hết chúng ta, đạt được độc lập về năng lượng. Miền Tây Pennsylvania sẽ ở đâu nếu không có Tổ hợp hóa dầu Shell" - ban biên tập của tờ báo chỉ ra, đề cập tới một cơ sở được xây dựng cách Pittsburgh khoảng 40km.

Ở phía tây Pennsylvania, công nghệ khai thác dầu fracking hay còn gọi là công nghệ nứt vỡ thủy lực (hydraulic fracturing), được sử dụng để khai thác dầu và khí đốt từ đá phiến sét. Cựu Phó Tổng thống Joe Biden cho biết, ông sẽ hạn chế các hợp đồng thuê mới với các khu đất của liên bang, trong khi Tổng thống Donald Trump thúc đẩy hoạt động này.

Ông Trump cho rằng, việc ông Biden chuyển hướng khỏi nhiên liệu hóa thạch sẽ làm mất việc làm. Ông Biden đã đề xuất kế hoạch trị giá 2 nghìn tỉ USD để chống lại biến đổi khí hậu và loại bỏ khí thải carbon khỏi lưới điện vào năm 2035.

"Chắc chắn ông Donald Trump không phải là Churchill, nhưng ông ấy đã hoàn thành công việc", bài viết của tờ báo nổi tiếng nhấn mạnh.

Theo Wall Street Journal, dù ca ngợi thành tích của ông Donald Trump, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette cũng lên tiếng chỉ trích tính khí của tổng thống, cách xử lý đại dịch và khả năng đoàn kết đất nước.

Tuy nhiên, bài viết của Pittsburgh Post-Gazette lưu ý: "Tờ báo này đã không ủng hộ một đảng viên Cộng hòa làm tổng thống kể từ năm 1972; nhưng chúng tôi tin rằng ông Trump... là lựa chọn tốt hơn trong năm nay".

Sự ủng hộ được đưa ra cùng ngày khi New York Times và Siena College công bố một loạt các cuộc thăm dò mới về các bang chiến trường cho thấy ông Biden dẫn trước với cách biệt đa dạng.

Ông Biden dẫn trước ông Trump ở Pennsylvania và Arizona với 6 điểm, Florida 3 điểm và Wisconsin 11 điểm. Tổng thống Donald Trump vốn thắng ở cả 4 bang này trong cuộc bầu cử Mỹ năm 2016.

Tháng trước, Philadelphia Inquirer, nhật báo lớn nhất của bang Pennsylvania, đã ủng hộ ứng viên Đảng Dân chủ Joe Biden.

Cả hai ứng cử viên đều đang vận động tranh cử rầm rộ ở Pennsylvania - động thái cho thấy đây có thể là bang quyết định trong ngày bầu cử Mỹ 3.11.

Hôm 31.10, Tổng thống Donald Trump có 4 sự kiện trong tiểu bang. Hôm 1.11, Tổng thống Donald Trump và ứng viên Joe Biden đều có chiến dịch vận động tranh cử ở Pennsylvania.

https://laodong.vn/the-gioi/ung-ho-...dia-pennsylvania-pha-le-nua-the-ky-850989.ldo
 

Haibara Ai

Senior Member
Ông Biden dẫn trước ông Trump ở Pennsylvania và Arizona với 6 điểm, Florida 3 điểm và Wisconsin 11 điểm. Tổng thống Donald Trump vốn thắng ở cả 4 bang này trong cuộc bầu cử Mỹ năm 2016.
sao ở đâu Hiden cũng dẫn tr'c vậy
 

bazh

Đã tốn tiền
Tờ báo này là tờ báo dành cho bọn bần nông ít học ah?
Chứ mấy thằng bưng phở chắc nó éo thèm đọc đâu.
báo này dành cho những ai chưa được phát sách Tam Bách Hài Tử Đích Biên Mã đọc thôi
 

canvas101

Senior Member

canvas101

Senior Member
Chạy KPI thì quan tâm gì tới comment mai phen. Cứ để nó chạy đi, covid bị cắt thưởng nên phải cố.
:big_smile: Nếu để chạy KPI thì mỗi tờ báo trên kia tôi post được 1 bài tại Voz giống y như cái thớt này pheng ạ.
 

dinhcaitau

Senior Member
Governments vary in their structure, their size, and the way they operate. Two questions are of special importance in determining how governments differ: Who governs? And how much government control is permitted?

Some nations are governed by a single individual—a king or dictator, for example. This state of affairs is called autocracy. Where a small group—perhaps landowners, military officers, or the wealthy—controls most of the governing decisions, that government is said to be an oligarchy. If citizens are vested with the power to rule themselves, that government is a democracy.

Governments also vary considerably in terms of how they govern. In the United States and a small number of other nations, governments are limited as to what they are permitted to control (substantive limits) and how they go about it (pro- cedural limits). Governments that are limited in this way are called constitutional governments, or liberal governments. In other nations, including many in Latin America, Asia, and Africa, the law imposes few real limits. The government, how- ever, is nevertheless kept in check by other political and social institutions that it is unable to control and must come to terms with—such as autonomous territories, an organized religion, organized business groups, or organized labor unions. Such governments are generally called authoritarian. In a third group of nations, includ- ing the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin, Nazi Germany, perhaps prewar Japan and Italy, and North Korea today, governments not only are free of legal limits but also seek to eliminate those organized social groups that might challenge or limit their authority. These governments typically attempt to dominate or control every sphere of political, economic, and social life and, as a result, are called totalitarian (see Figure 1.2).

Americans have the good fortune to live in a nation in which limits are placed on what governments can do and how they can do it. Many of the world’s people do not live in a constitutional democracy. By one measure, just 40 percent of the global population (those living in 86 countries) enjoy sufficient levels of political and personal freedom to be classified as living in a constitutional democracy.13 And constitutional democracies were unheard of before the modern era. Prior to the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, governments seldom sought—and rarely received—the support of their subjects. The available evidence strongly suggests that ordinary people often had little love for the government or for the social order. After all, they had no stake in it. They equated government with the police officer, the bailiff, and the tax collector.

Beginning in the seventeenth century, in a handful of Western nations, two im- portant changes began to take place in the character and conduct of government. First, governments began to acknowledge formal limits on their power. Second, a small number of governments began to provide ordinary citizens with a formal voice in public affairs—through the vote. Obviously, the desirability of limits on government and the expansion of popular influence were at the heart of the Amer- ican Revolution in 1776. “No taxation without representation,” as we shall see in Chapter 2, was fiercely asserted from the beginning of the Revolution through the Founding in 1789. But even before the Revolution, a tradition of limiting govern- ment and expanding participation in the political process had developed through- out western Europe.

Limiting Government

The key force behind the imposition of limits on government power was a new social class, the bourgeoisie, which became an important political force in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Bourgeois is a French word for “freeman of the city,” or bourg. Being part of the bourgeoisie later became associated with being “middle class” and with involvement in commerce or industry. In order to gain a share of control of government, joining or even displacing the kings, aristocrats, and gentry who had dominated government for centuries, the bour- geoisie sought to change existing institutions—especially parliaments—into in- struments of real political participation. Parliaments had existed for centuries but were generally aristocratic institutions. The bourgeoisie embraced parliaments as means by which they could exert the weight of their superior numbers and growing economic advantage over their aristocratic rivals. At the same time, the bourgeoisie sought to place restraints on the capacity of governments to threaten these economic and political interests by placing formal or constitutional limits on governmental power.

Although motivated primarily by the need to protect and defend their own interests, the bourgeoisie advanced many of the principles that would define the central underpinnings of individual liberty for all citizens—freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of conscience, and freedom from arbitrary search and seizure. The work of political theorists such as John Locke (1632–1704) and, later, John Stuart Mill (1806–73) helped shape these evolv- ing ideas about liberty and political rights. However, it is important to note that the bourgeoisie generally did not favor democracy as we know it. They were advocates of electoral and representative institutions, but they favored property requirements and other restrictions so as to limit participation to the middle and upper classes. Yet once these institutions of politics and the protec- tion of the right to engage in politics were established, it was difficult to limit them to the bourgeoisie.

Access to Government: The Expansion of Participation

The expansion of participation from the bourgeoisie to ever-larger segments of society took two paths. In some nations, popular participation was expanded by
the Crown or the aristocracy, which ironically saw common people as potential political allies against the bourgeoisie. Thus, in nineteenth-century Prussia, for ex- ample, it was the emperor and his great minister Otto von Bismarck who expanded popular participation in order to build political support among the lower orders.

In other nations, participation expanded because competing segments of the bourgeoisie sought to gain political advantage by reaching out to and mobilizing the support of working- and lower-class groups that craved the opportunity to take part in politics—“lining up the unwashed,” as one American historian put it.15 To be sure, excluded groups often agitated for greater participation. But seldom was such agitation by itself enough to secure the right to participate. Usually, expan- sion of voting rights resulted from a combination of pressure from below and help from above.
The gradual expansion of voting rights by groups hoping to derive some politi- cal advantage has been typical of American history. After the Civil War, one of the chief reasons that Republicans moved to enfranchise newly freed slaves was to use the support of the former slaves to maintain Republican control over the de- feated southern states. Similarly, in the early twentieth century, upper-middle-class Progressives advocated women’s suffrage because they believed that women were likely to support the reforms espoused by the Progressive movement.

Influencing the Government through Participation: Politics

Expansion of participation means that more and more people have a legal right to take part in politics. Politics is an important term. In its broadest sense, it refers to conflicts over the character, membership, and policies of any organization to which people belong. As Harold Lasswell, a famous political scientist, once put it, politics is the struggle over “who gets what, when, how.”16 Although politics is a phenom- enon that can be found in any organization, our concern in this book is narrower. Here, politics will be used to refer only to conflicts and struggles over the leader- ship, structure, and policies of governments. The goal of politics, as we define it, is to have a share or a say in the composition of the government’s leadership, how the government is organized, or what its policies are going to be. Having a share is called having power or influence.

Politics can take many forms, including everything from blogging and posting opinion pieces online, sending emails to government officials, voting, lobbying leg- islators on behalf of particular programs, and participating in protest marches and even violent demonstrations. A system of government that gives citizens a regular opportunity to elect the top government officials is usually called a representative democracy, or republic. A system that permits citizens to vote directly on laws and policies is often called a direct democracy. At the national level, the United States is a representative democracy in which citizens select government officials but do not vote on legislation. Some states and cities, however, have provisions for direct legislation through popular initiative and ballot referendum. These procedures allow citizens to collect petitions requiring an issue to be brought directly to the voters for a decision. In 2016, 165 initiatives appeared on state ballots, dealing with matters that ranged from gun control and raising the minimum wage to legaliz- ing marijuana. Many hot-button issues are decided by initiatives. For example, in Colorado in 2010, voters passed a referendum that called on the state to sue the federal government to enforce immigration laws. Often, broad public campaigns pro- mote controversial referenda, attempting to persuade voters to change existing laws.

For example, in 2016 nine states considered measures that would either decriminalize marijuana or legalize it altogether. Some 82 million people would be affected by the outcome of these contests. Four states considered additional gun control regulations. Colorado voters weighed an amendment to the state constitu- tion that would create a single-payer health system funded by a tax on employers and employees. In California, voters decided on whether to support a ban on plas- tic bags, the first such statewide ban.

Groups and organized interests do not vote (although their members do), but they certainly do participate in politics. Their political activities usually consist of such endeavors as providing funds for candidates, lobbying, and trying to influence public opinion. The pattern of struggles among interests is called group politics, or pluralism. Americans have always been ambivalent about pluralist politics. On the one hand, the right of groups to press their views and compete for influence in the gov- ernment is the essence of liberty. On the other hand, Americans often fear that or- ganized groups may sometimes exert too much influence, advancing special interests at the expense of larger public interests. (We return to this problem in Chapter 11.)

Sometimes, of course, politics does not take place through formal channels at all but instead involves direct action. Direct action politics can include either violent politics or civil disobedience, both of which attempt to shock rulers into behaving more responsibly. Direct action can also be a form of revolutionary politics, which rejects the system entirely and attempts to replace it with a new ruling group and a new set of rules. In recent years in the United States, groups ranging from ani- mal rights activists to right-to-life advocates to the Occupy Wall Street protesters have used direct action to underline their demands. Many forms of peaceful direct political action are protected by the U.S. Constitution. The country’s Founders knew that the right to protest is essential to the maintenance of political freedom, even where the ballot box is available.
 

seven

Senior Member
Đấy, chửi nhau như này có phải ý nghĩa hơn không? Những thứ trực tiếp ảnh hưởng đến mình chứ chửi CS liên quan đéo gì.
 
Top