1924: Davis vs Coolidge
President Harding first introduced the idea of talking to the public on the radio in 1921 however it was not up until the 1924 presidential election that it was actually used. By this time countless Americans had getting sets in their living rooms and they were all expecting to hear what the candidates had to say. Such a huge importance was put on this new innovation that Coolidge and Davis were actually made to sit in a glass booth on-stage, in-front of 16,000 people, and told to avoid their normal pacing back and forth, to ensure that the microphone would get whatever they stated.
Across the nation schools were closed so that trainees might listen and individuals gathered around radios in department stores and at home. Sales of receiving sets struck a record high and 'Nation' magazine printed that "1924 would be reviewed as the radio year". For the first time the American voters were able to listen in on a governmental election, thanks to this brand-new technology.
1960: Nixon vs Kennedy
The first ever telecasted presidential dispute was broadcast on Sep 26th 1960 and it was an event that changed the face of US politics forever. The 88% of Americans who saw it on TV were witness to an entirely different picture - one of Nixon looking frail and weak from a current operation, as well as sweating and looking really anxious. In contrast, Kennedy looked calm, confident and strong and there was no doubt that, for those who had actually seen it with their own eyes, he had won.
2012: Obama vs Romney
The photo of President Obama hugging his partner has actually ended up being the most re-tweeted post in the history of Twitter and this is a fitting nod to the substantial part that this site has had to play in the recent US Election. The truth that it was published before Obama even required to the phase to thank his advocates personally illustrates how important this social media platform was to his project. At one point on the election night, users tweeted at a rate of 327,452 per minute.
Facebook was also used to its complete capacity by both candidates with the fan pages and member-to-member communications as well as more original and exciting ideas such as an 'I Voted' button at the top of news feeds, that is accountable for an approximated third of a million extra individuals voting alone.
It has been 15 years given that sports politics landed the Springboks the Ellis We Trophy, the World Cup of Rugby under the most difficult of situations. South Africa has simply emerged from the shadows of Apartheid. Nelson Mandela was just elected the nation's very first colored President by the black bulk population. However the group that represented the Springboks in the 1995 World Cup was still made up of all white players other than for a certain Chester William. Sports politics was the last thing on anybody's mind.
In the middle of all the reforms and favorable outlook in a post-Apartheid era, the stress in South Africa in between the white Afrikaner ex-ruling class and the bulk black population still sizzle underneath an apparent state of reform and favorable outlook. All that changed when the underdog Springboks, versus all chances and expectations defeated the overwhelming favorites, New Zealand. In a miraculous stroke, Nelson Mandela has summoned not simply a World Cup win, but began a healing process of change within a violence-ravaged country so staved of peace and consistency for centuries. It proved that there belongs for sports to play in the complex world of political differences, strive and struggles in our modern-day societies. This type of sports politics has a great deal of potential for us to check out.
There are those that argue that sports and politics do not mix. They claim that there is no such thing as sports politics. They claim that both are of different character and extremes. The previous is gentlemanly, enthusiastic and non-violent. While https://rotherhamandbarnsleylibdems.blogspot.com/2020/05/rotherham-and-barnsley-lib-dems-news.html the latter is unpredictable, uncalled for, and often revealed in the violent kinds of war, bigotry, riots and unrest. We can not reject such traits of sports and politics. However if we look deeper at sports and politics, both are essentially battles of a various kind. As George Orwell when said, "sport is essentially war minus the shooting".
If only humanity can fix their distinctions by sports politics on the football field rather than the battle field. If only, Hitler attempts to prove his racial supremacy in sports field rather than in the death camps of Auschwitz. If just, the soldiers of this world are more excited to wear their jerseys than their fight gear. If only politicians can let a game choose the fate of countries, rather than mobilize for war. Life on earth would be more meaningful, harmonious and tranquil with sports politics. People can than tackle their tasks without fear of their race, color, faiths or birth rights. Yes, there is space for us humans to evoke this spirit of sports politics to fix our world's issues.
It might seem insignificant and silly. Why not let our kids and future generations address this concern: "Would you rather prepare difficult and eventually lose on the sports field, or train hard and pass away on a battleground?" This rhetoric question asks no answers. All of us know the best response and the best thing to do. However why are we so excited still to bear arms and run the risk of death. I believe that in this modern world of weapons of mass destruction, we should seriously think about utilizing other methods like sports politics to resolve our distinctions and develop a better world. If we do not and continue to turn to war and violence, there will be very little of a location for us to call home.