Domestic Terrorism, Attack on the U.S. Capitol, and the Second Impeachment of Donald Trump

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence J. Trautman
Keyword(s):  
Domestic Terrorism ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
The U.S

Palestine Unbound

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 130-134
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Task Force ◽  
The United States ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Tel Aviv ◽  
The Us ◽  
Intention To Move ◽  
Arab Israeli Conflict ◽  
The U.S

This section, updated regularly on the blog Palestine Square, covers popular conversations related to the Palestinians and the Arab-Israeli conflict during the quarter 16 November 2017 to 15 February 2018: #JerusalemIstheCapitalofPalestine went viral after U.S. president Donald Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and announced his intention to move the U.S. embassy there from Tel Aviv. The arrest of Palestinian teenager Ahed Tamimi for slapping an Israeli soldier also prompted a viral campaign under the hashtag #FreeAhed. A smaller campaign protested the exclusion of Palestinian human rights from the agenda of the annual Creating Change conference organized by the US-based National LGBTQ Task Force in Washington. And, UNRWA publicized its emergency funding appeal, following the decision of the United States to slash funding to the organization, with the hashtag #DignityIsPriceless.

scholarly journals Europe Abhors Donald Trump: The Opinion on the 2020 U.S. Presidential Elections and Their Candidates in the European Newspapers

2021 ◽  
pp. 000276422110055
Author(s):  
Marçal Sintes-Olivella ◽  
Pere Franch ◽  
Elena Yeste-Piquer ◽  
Klaus Zilles
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Methodology ◽  
Election Campaign ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Presidential Debates ◽  
White House ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Public ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Common ◽  
The U.S

What is the opinion held by the European press on the U.S. election campaign and the candidates running for president? What are the predominant issues that attract the attention of European print media? Does Europe detest Donald Trump? The objective of the present study is to analyze the perception European commentators had of the 2020 race for the White House. The media, the audience, and European governments were captivated more than ever before by how the U.S. election campaign unfolded, fixing their gaze on the contest between Donald Trump and Joe Biden. Through a combined quantitative and qualitative methodology, a combination of content analysis and the application of framing theory (hitherto scarcely applied to opinion pieces), our research centers on exploring the views, opinions, and analyses published in eight leading newspapers from four European countries (France, Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom) as expressed in their editorials and opinion articles. This study observes how the televised presidential debates were commented on, interpreted, and assessed by commentators from the eight newspapers we selected. The goal was to identify the common issues and frames that affected European public opinion on the U.S. presidential campaign and the aspirants to the White House.

scholarly journals Framing Immigration and Illegal Immigration in the 2016 Presidential Campaigns: Comparing Donald Trump and Bernie Sander’s Position

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-22
Author(s):  
JIN YANG
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Illegal Immigration ◽  
News Coverage ◽  
Presidential Campaign ◽  
Illegal Immigrants ◽  
Function Approach ◽  
Immigration Reform ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Tv News ◽  
The U.S

This study compared the U.S. TV news coverage of Donald Trump’s and Bernie Sanders’ talking points on immigration in the 2016 presidential campaign. Utilizing six common frames on immigration in general and adopting framing’s function approach (which consists of definition, causes and solutions aspects of an issue or a topic under discussion) to illegal immigration, the study content analyzed 153 TV news transcripts. Trump's talking points highlighted the claim that immigrants were dangerous because they brought crimes to U.S., and they had to be deported and borders must be secured. Sanders’ talking points emphasized the idea of a nation of immigrants where even illegal immigrants should be entitled to basic human rights, and immigration reform constituted a better solution. The causes for illegal immigration, however, were largely marginalized in the TV news coverage. Keywords: Framing immigration, framing illegal immigration, framing’s function approach, 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, U.S. TV news coverage of election

Understanding Michigan's Electoral Competitiveness: Swing Counties 1976-2018

2021 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-201
Author(s):  
JOHN S. KLEMANSKI ◽  
DAVID A. DULIO ◽  
DOUGLAS A. CARR
Keyword(s):  
Voting Behavior ◽  
Barack Obama ◽  
County Level ◽  
Major Focus ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Media Attention ◽  
Election Results ◽  
Gubernatorial Election ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Electoral Competitiveness

ABSTRACT Considerable media attention was given to the so-called “pivot counties” in the U.S. and in Michigan that flipped from supporting Barack Obama twice to voting for Donald Trump in 2016. We first summarize theories of voting behavior and speculate about why Michigan has been consistently competitive over the years. We explore 40 years' worth of county-level presidential and gubernatorial election results in Michigan to determine how frequently counties have flipped across a large number of elections. We find that a number of Michigan counties frequently flip between elections, but the number of competitive Michigan counties has substantially declined in recent decades. Turnout in larger counties can affect election outcomes, and large counties that swing have been key bellwethers in past elections, and should be a major focus of research on future elections in Michigan.

Update on Conflict and Diplomacy

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 135-171
Author(s):  
Paul Karolyi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Humanitarian Aid ◽  
The United States ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Palestinian Refugees ◽  
Tel Aviv ◽  
Palestinian Territories ◽  
National Reconciliation ◽  
Reconciliation Process ◽  
The U.S

This update summarizes bilateral, multilateral, regional, and international events affecting the Palestinians and Israel during the quarter from 16 November 2017 to 15 February 2018. Highlights include: U.S. president Donald Trump pledged to move the U.S. embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and formally recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital, reversing decades of U.S. policy. His decision provoked an international backlash, sparked a wave of protests and clashes in the occupied Palestinian territories, and compromised his own diplomatic efforts. The Israelis celebrated Trump's decision, while the Palestinians cited it as an illustration of the United States' pro-Israel bias and as the reason for their rejection of U.S. mediation in any future peace talks. Outraged, Trump ordered punitive cuts to U.S. humanitarian aid designated for Palestinian refugees, further undercutting any peace initiative, which advisors insisted was still under way. The Palestinians began pursuing a new, multilateral framework to continue the peace process. Amid these developments, the Palestinian national reconciliation process stalled once again.

Notes from the Editors, April 2019

2019 ◽  
pp. c2-62
Author(s):  
The Editors
Keyword(s):  
Latin American ◽  
Social Reform ◽  
Democratic Party ◽  
The United States ◽  
Important Goal ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Social Democratic ◽  
Reform Program ◽  
Socialist Movement ◽  
The U.S

buy this issue In the midst of the U.S.-directed coup attempt against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela in January–February, Donald Trump delivered a number of verbal attacks on socialism in Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua. The immediate object was to justify U.S. attempts to overthrow the Bolivarian Republic. The less immediate, but hardly less important, goal was to tarnish the growing social democratic (self-styled democratic socialist) movement in the United States, associated with figures like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. In order to safeguard their ambitious social-reform program, the new coterie of Democratic Party socialists have thus sought to separate themselves from Venezuela and other Latin American socialist states, presumably abandoning these countries to their fates at the hands of U.S. imperialism. This raises the historic question of social imperialism—a policy of social reform at home and imperial hegemony abroad.

Voters’ Perceptions of Trust in 2016 Presidential Candidates, Clinton and Trump: Exploring the Election’s Outcome

2017 ◽  
Vol 63 (7) ◽  
pp. 856-887 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pamela S. Shockley-Zalabak ◽  
Sherwyn P. Morreale ◽  
Carmen Stavrositu
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Electoral College ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Popular Vote ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Presidential Candidates ◽  
The Third ◽  
General Trust ◽  
Registered Voters ◽  
The U.S

This study explored voters’ perceptions of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump regarding their general trust in the two 2016 presidential candidates, voters’ demographics, five underlying drivers of trust, and important campaign issues. The study also examined how perceptions of trust on issues were evidenced in the popular vote and in key swing states and the Electoral College. The study used two online census-representative surveys to examine registered voters’ perceptions: one survey of 1,500 respondents conducted immediately before the first presidential debate (September 7-15, 2016) and a second survey of a different sample of 1,500 immediately after the third debate (October 20-31), 2016. Analysis of the results confirmed relatively low-trust levels for both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump and an electorate divided demographically about their trust in the two candidates. The five trust drivers yielded statistically significant differences between the candidates. Clinton was evaluated as more competent, concerned, and reliable, and a person with whom participants identified. With the second survey, Trump statistically surpassed Clinton for openness and honesty. Regarding the three issues of most importance in the campaign, Clinton and Trump had equivalent trust evaluations for dealing with the U.S. economy/jobs, but Trump was more trusted regarding terrorism/national security and Clinton was more trusted regarding health care. The overall trust evaluations for Clinton, coupled with intentions to vote, contribute to understanding Clinton’s popular vote victory. However, the importance of terrorism/national security in swing states and Trump’s trust advantage on that issue contributes to understanding the Electoral College vote by comparison with the popular vote.

scholarly journals U.S. Policy Toward the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict under the Trump Administration: Continuity or Change?

2020 ◽  
pp. 125-146
Author(s):  
Ayfer Erdogan ◽  
Lourdes Habash
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
West Bank ◽  
Large Fraction ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
The West ◽  
Oslo Accords ◽  
The Future ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Trump Administration

The 2017 inauguration of Donald Trump as the U.S. president opened a new chapter in U.S. policy making toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Several developments that have taken place under the Trump Administration mark a clear rupture from the Oslo Accords in favor of support for Israeli plans to annex a large fraction of the West Bank and design a new settlement of the conflict according to its interests. While the U.S. policy toward the Palestinian issue is not radically different under Trump, he does break from former presidents in that he overtly indicates a sharp pro-Israel tilt and has been more transparent about the U.S. position in the conflict. In this context, in light of the developments that have taken place in the last three years, this article aims to investigate the main pillars of the U.S. foreign policy toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and to analyze how far the Trump Administration’s policies toward the conflict indicate a shift from those of his predecessors. It also offers some insights into the future of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by providing three prospective scenarios and discussing their repercussions.

scholarly journals Deconstructing Nonviolence and the War-Machine: Unarmed Coups, Nonviolent Power, and Armed Resistance

2021 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 421-433
Author(s):  
Christopher J. Finlay
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
Political Change ◽  
Effective Means ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Democratic Institutions ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Civil Resistance ◽  
War Machine ◽  
The Face ◽  
The U.S

AbstractProponents of nonviolent tactics often highlight the extent to which they rival arms as effective means of resistance. Erica Chenoweth and Maria Stephan, for instance, compare civil resistance favorably to armed insurrection as means of bringing about progressive political change. In Ethics, Security, and the War-Machine, Ned Dobos cites their work in support of the claim that similar methods—organized according to Gene Sharp's idea of “civilian-based defense”—may be substituted for regular armed forces in the face of international aggression. I deconstruct this line of pacifist thought by arguing that it builds on the wrong binary. Turning away from a violence-nonviolence dichotomy structured around harmfulness, I look to Richard B. Gregg and Hannah Arendt for an account of nonviolent power defined by non-coercion. Whereas nonviolent coercion in the wrong hands still has the potential to subvert democratic institutions—just as armed methods can—Gregg's and Arendt's conceptions of nonviolent power identify a necessary bulwark against both forms of subversion. The dangers of nonviolent coercion can be seen in the largely nonviolent attempts at civil subversion by supporters of Donald Trump during Trump's attempts to overturn the results of the U.S. presidential election in 2020, while the effectiveness of noncoercive, nonviolent power is illustrated by the resistance of U.S. democratic institutions to resist them.

scholarly journals THE U.S. – JAPAN RELATIONS UNDER THE ADMINISTRATION OF DONALD TRUMP

2021 ◽  
pp. 29-36
Author(s):  
N. Gorodnia
Keyword(s):  
Democratic Party ◽  
Liberal Democratic Party ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Clean Energy ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Environmental Initiatives ◽  
Regional Energy ◽  
Liberal Democratic ◽  
Security Relations ◽  
The U.S

This paper describes and discusses the major developments in the U.S.-Japan relations under the administration of Donald Trump (January 2017–January 2021) in political, commercial and economic, and energy areas. In political sphere, the research focuses on continuity and changes in the U.S. policy towards bilateral security alliance with Japan. The research has revealed that D. Trump's statements on security relations with allies and trade during his presidential campaign were cause for concern in Japan. To avoid their implementation, the prime-minister Shinzo Abe (Liberal Democratic Party) managed to establish close personal relations with Donald Trump and successfully navigated them until his resignation in September 2020. Importantly, Abe succeeded in separating issues of security and trade in a bilateral dialogue with the U.S. As a result, Trump's preelection statements on security with Japan had not been implemented. Moreover, the U.S.-Japan security cooperation strengthened based at the mutual support of "free and open Indo-Pacific" strategy. In commercial and economic area, new trade policies of Trump administration since 2018 had an impact on Japan. Abe failed to persuade D. Trump to return to multinational Trans Pacific Partnership free trade agreement. A large U.S. deficit in trade with Japan caused bilateral negotiations on trade issues. Their first stage was completed in September 2019. However, the trade agreement did not cover cars and auto parts, which composed 75 percent of Japan's export to the U.S. In energy sector, the focus of bilateral cooperation shifted from clean energy and environmental initiatives of Obama administration to energy security and integration of regional energy market in the Indo-Pacific. Two countries prioritized cooperation in Liquefied natural gas (LNG) sector, in which they had complementary interests. The policy of Shinzo Abe with respect to the U.S. was continued by the new government of Japan by Yoshihide Suga (Liberal Democratic Party).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document