Filed under: Life
I’ve been ambivalent about moving to D.C. on Tuesday and spending pretty much my entire summer there. This should be the opportunity of a lifetime – working as a fellow at the Roosevelt Academy and interning at the National Academy of Social Insurance on non-profit development and organization.
Ever since visiting D.C. during my senior year of high school, I have know that aside from West Hartford and Boston, D.C. could easily be my home. There is so much to do, so much to see, and so much politics.
Of course, my internship could be better. My housing could be closer to the city. I could be with friends. But really, why am I so worried about traveling out on my own again and exploring a new city. I love doing things like that.
Reasoning out my conflicting emotions yesterday, I realized that I’m actually frightened about going to D.C. I’m not worried about getting lost or having to live on my own – I do that now and can completely handle the situation. I am worried about being bored at work or being stressed out from juggling a full-time internship, two sets of policy and leadership seminars, studying for the GRE and LSAT exams, working on grad school and law school applications, and completing my full-time research assignment. I am worried about missing out on something because I am going to be so busy.
But the reality is, I am probably most afraid about not fitting in. Silly, I know. I have transfered schools and made friends. Gone abroad and made friends. Gone to college and made friends. What am I really so worried about?
Hopefully D.C. will turn out to be all that I hoped that it would be when I was 18 (I cannot truthfully say that I hope that it will turn out to the way I hope now, because right now, truth be told, I do not have high expectations). Hopefully, I will be able to handle all of my jobs and summer work along with making time to have fun. Hopefully, I’ll be able to explore the city and develop a feel for the most politically-connected area in the nation. And most importantly, I hope that I will be able to make as many friends and connections as possible. :)
Filed under: British Politics
1866. Talking about the role of statesmen:
The man who above all others was supposed to have stored his mind with all the riches of historical truth and political science, and constitutional lore, in order that he might see farther and soar higher than other men—that he might bring in a knowledge of principles, of precedents, of maxims, of legislative science, in order to foresee, to provide, to avert—and so far as the limitation of poor human faculties will allow it—to foretel and command the future.
Filed under: Life
After being SLAMMED in Hartford Magazine’s best places to live index (West Hartford was placed right above New Britain in the large towns category), Kiplinger’s “Best Cities for the Next Decade” gives us the #9 spot in the nation. Don’t worry, D.C. is at #3.
9. West Hartford, Conn.
Community is key in West Hartford, a place where you actually know your neighbors. But this once-sleepy suburb of Connecticut’s capital is not content to be merely an idyllic place to live and raise a family (it is, by the way). West Hartford made our list because it is transforming itself from a suburb into a destination — in this case, a regional destination for shopping and dining. Small business is the new game in town, and everyone is playing.
Filed under: State Politics
Endorsed by Congressman Larson and West Hartford’s Mayor Scott Slifka:
Mayor R. Scott Slifka held an announcement Monday afternoon to publicize his endorsement of former Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy for governor. The Malloy ticket includes running mate Nancy Wyman for lieutenant governor.
“As Mayor of Stamford for 14 years, Malloy certainly has the experience,” Slifka said at a press conference on the steps of the town hall. “His track record is a great one, and I believe he’s just a natural fit for the position.”
In acceptance of the endorsement, Malloy said: “West Hartford has been a model for providing great services to town residents while still running a tight financial ship. As governor, I’ll work to bring that kind of success to towns and cities across the state.”
Filed under: Judiciary
A remembrance via twitter:
Filed under: Boston
It all works perfectly together :)
Another good way to study for a Campaigns and Elections exam – read coverage of the British elections.
Via Andrew (the sources for all things British politics, especially as far as Stephen Colbert is concerned):
This just about sums up the state of play right now:
A hung parliament is virtually inevitable. With more than 500 seats counted, the BBC is predicting that the Conservatives will end up with 306 seats, Labour 262 seats and the Lib Dems 55 seats. The Conservatives are currently on 37% of the vote, Labour on 28% and the Lib Dems on 23%.
• Gordon Brown has said that it is his “duty” to try to form a stable government. Constitutionally, he is right. Given that the Tories do not have a majority, he is entitled to form a government and to try to get a Queen’s speech through the Commons. He only has to resign if the Queen’s speech is voted down. (Effectively it’s a confidence vote.) Although some reporters travelling with him think he seems gloomy about his long-term prospects, he claims to be “energised” by the result and Labour have started semi-public negotiations with the Lib Dems about a coalition. Ministers such as Lord Mandelson and Alan Johnson have indicated that they would like to do a deal over PR.
I can’t imagine Brown taking this as a mandate to carry on. But the intrigue is just beginning. Latest results here.
And from the CNN of Britain (given that title because of their impressive use of interactive features) – we have the Guardian’s results map.
Kensington, the constituency that I lived in while abroad has reelected a Conservative MP again in Malcolm Rifkind. Again, the Guardian tops all with it’s electoral coverage at the constituency-level. While yes, Britain is a much smaller country than the US, American news media should take note of the information the Guardian has included on the constituency pages: constituency profile, results for 2010, turnout for 2010, results from 1992 (a comparable election), national marginality, notional results from 2005 (what 2005 would have looked like if it had incorporated the redistricting changes that have affected the 2010 results), and party literature. Impressive.
Filed under: Life
Via Aunt Diane’s chain message. I’m a Katherine Hepburn :)
You are smart, a real thinker. Every situation is approached with a plan.
You are very healthy in mind and body. You don’t take crap from anyone. You
have only a couple of individuals that you consider ‘real friends’. You
teach strong family values. Keep your feet planted in them, but don’t
overlook a bad situation when it does happen.
It’s finals season and with a case study and two seminar papers written, it’s off to studying Campaigns and Elections for my exam on Saturday. But in the midst of procrastinating, I came upon a twitter post linking to a Jonathan Chait article on TNR discussing Mark Penn’s failure to grasp even the minute aspects of American politics.
Penn’s Argument: America is headed towards the introduction of a viable third party along the center of the vast divide between the political ideologies of the Democrats and Republicans. This third party will be socially liberal and fiscally conservative.
Penn’s Evidence: The American system of federalism and separation of powers was bound to produce and reinforce two-party strength, especially with the introduction of campaign finance laws and redistricting. There is currently a gulf in American political representation, as most Americans identify as independents.
Chait’s Response: Chait points out Penn’s lack of recognition of the role that America’s first-past-the-post electoral system (plurality rule) and electoral college play in discouraging third parties. He then goes on to show note that as any student of political science knows, the number of people who self-identify as independents bares little relationship to those people actually having little to no affiliation with a particular political ideology (traditionally, even independents tend to hold strong political views and vote certain ways – either Democrat or Republican). Finally, Chait argues that the underrepresented opinion in this nation is not socially liberal and economic conservative, but rather economically liberal and socially conservative (think Catholics).
Read Chait’s response in full. It should teach you a little bit about the basics of political science and it sure helped me study for my exam.