Research Log #6

Christian Arakawa
16 November 2017
EQ: What are the foundational differences between the primary political parties in America?
Three points to prove #1: Each political party differs in their fiscal policies.
#2: Each party focuses on a specific voter base that drives its social issues
#3: The political parties have different stances on the military and diplomatic issues.
Point that this Source/Information Proves: The political parties have different stances on the military and
diplomatic issues.
Excerpts (These should provide insight into the designated Point to Prove):
Traditionally, Democratic foreign policy is generalized to include concern with human rights, skepticism of the
military and the use of armed force, preference for diplomatic solutions and international engagement, and a
humble view of national standing that looks more toward what the country could become but has not yet
evolved towards, making their tone and worldview seem more apologetic than assertive.
Their traditional (but also stereotyped) distrust of military force in favor of diplomacy has also opened them up
to attacks that Democrats are weak on national security issues and (according to the stereotype) therefore would
prefer talk their way out of problems rather than assertively confront them.
For all of the Democratic base’s unease that President Obama’s secretiveness and assertiveness in pursuing al
Qaeda has undermined the rule of law, the fact that the Democrats can stress their national security record at the
convention shows that the President is unlikely to change course for the sake of his base.
U.S. President Donald Trump’s fellow Republicans in Congress on Tuesday assailed his proposed cuts in the
diplomatic and foreign aid budget, making it unlikely the cutbacks in global health, peacekeeping and other
programs will take effect.
Trump claimed that many U.S. allies take Washington’s support for granted, and countries should contribute
more financially for U.S. security guarantees in order to ensure that American troops will come to their aid.
Analysis (How does this source support the Point to Prove?):
When talking about foreign diplomats (diplomatic issues) and military issues, the Democrats and
Republicans have many different ideas. A typical stereotype on diplomatic issues is that Democrats would
rather broker ideas and peace while Republicans would rather do military action. While this is sometimes true,
this is not always the case; it is only a stereotype. While focusing on diplomatic issues, the two parties have
their own ideas that both claim is better in protecting Americans and American values.
In the past election, candidate Donald Trump said on multiple occasions (at debates and rallies) "peace
through strength". This was a term coined by the 40th president of the United States, Ronald Regan. This action
called for increasing the size and strength of the military. This would cause America to win more wars, and the
world would respect America even more. Now that Donald Trump is President he did in fact increase the size of
the military in hopes the world would respect us more. In a recent poll Americans fell to the number two slot in
most respected countries. Germany out beat America by a margin of 5%. It may not seem like a lot, but to
America and American values it hurts us dearly.
 In the past election, Candidate Hillary Clinton and the Democratic party stood for a belief that
"Democrats further believe that when America leads, it should be a principled force of peace and prosperity in
the world". What that basically means is that we should put peace solutions on the table and use the military as
last resort. This has been a democratic stand point since the 1930's. In 1939 WW2 happened and then President
Rossovelt did not want to get involved in war. He wanted to broker peace and stay out of the war. When
America was bombed, he threw peace of the table and use the military action. This is when America can show
its power and true colors.
Source
Ponnuru, Ramesh. "A Duty of Government". National Review. National Review Inc. October 14, 2001
http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=4&sid=a9596f80-d46f- 486e-be0e-
e270e6428f9e%40pdc-v-sessmgr01. Accesed 17 November 2017