Measuring Presidential popularity with merchandise

There are traditional ways to measure Presidential popularity: polls that in some way measure approval or disapproval. Here is another possible way: sales of Presidential merchandise.

I’ve always wondered why Presidents or other political officials allow such merchandizing using their figures and words in order to make money. Perhaps it is simply publicity (even if it is in opposition to them). Or perhaps they don’t want to appear to be the politicians who cracks down on such things. Or perhaps by running for or entering public office, there is a tacit understanding that they are now in the public eye and can be used for money-making purposes.

And what does it mean culturally to reduce any politician to a piece of merchandise?

Who comes after Mayor Daley?

With Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley’s announcement that he will not seek election in 2011, who is going to be the next mayor?

This promises to be a fascinating race, with “no shortage of mayor candidates.” Perhaps Rahm Emanuel, perhaps another Daley, perhaps a current lower-level city or county official.

While there will be a lot of people salivating at the first opportunity to win the mayoral spot in over 20 years, I’m sure not sure this is much of a prize. Chicago faces numerous issues including a large budget shortfall and ever-present issues with crime and education.

It will also be interesting to see how Mayor Daley will be remembered as he finishes his term. Will he go out on a low note (particularly with his recent low approval rating) or will he be recognized for helping Chicago escape Rust Belt status?

Glenn Beck illustrates how Evangelicals are successful in American politics

Sociologist Michael Lindsay examines Glenn Beck’s speech from this past weekend and argues Beck illustrates what Evangelicals do so well:

With those seven words, Glenn Beck accomplished two complementary but seemingly opposite objectives, much like [Rick] Warren does at the outset of his [The Purpose Driven Life] book. He diminished the crowd’s sense that they can do anything ultimately important while simultaneously endowing their attempts with a sense of sacred purpose. It’s as if Beck said to the throngs, “Put away your placards, and give up on your political machinations. We’re not in control.” But using the exact same words, he was exhorting, “We have a bigger obligation to play whatever role we are given in this larger divine drama.”

This relativizing/sacralizing of actions is precisely why evangelicals are so successful in American politics.

What Beck’s call to action will lead to remains to be seen. But, as Lindsay suggests, his uniting of faith and political action may very well influence the Republican Party in the near future.

Another debate over Washington crowd estimate

The actors are different but the question is the same: just how many people attended Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally over the weekend in Washington, D.C.?

This is not an isolated question. The National Park Service bowed out of official estimates back in 1997:

The media, in years past, would typically cite the National Parks Service estimate, along with the organizer’s estimates (which tend to be higher). But the Parks Service stopped providing crowd estimates in 1997 after organizers of the 1995 Million Man March assailed the agency for allegedly undercounting the turnout for that event.

So various media outlets (and interested parties) are now left making competing estimates based on aerial photos, how much space a person typically takes up, and other sources.

There has to be a better solution to this problem.

Politics in sociology

A behavioral sciences graduate from Israel describes his experiences in a sociology department and compares sociologists to journalists at YNetNews:

Anyone who ever read a sociological essay immediately realized that to a large extent a sociologist is just like a newspaper columnist.

The sociologist’s columns tend to be longer and more deeply reasoned, yet at their base there will always be an expression of a wholly political view.

While this former student describes a department where only one ideology was allowed, he raises an interesting issue in sociological work. On one hand, research is supposed to be science: rational, logical arguments and theories built upon accurate measurements of what is actually happening in the world. On the other hand, researchers do have opinions and political stances and they tend to do work in areas of their own interest.This was first made clear to me in graduate school when professors quickly switched between their activist and political interests and the research pieces they were working on.

My research methods class starts with a discussion of Max Weber’s essay about “value-free” sociology. Weber suggests sociologists should not make value judgments. Students tend to argue that we all have a bias and this is very difficult to remove from our social science work.

The comparison to journalists is also interesting. In my introduction to sociology class, I suggest sociologists are different than journalists in that sociologists draw upon more comprehensive data and are not just writing opinions or drawing conclusions based on a few interviews. Additionally, journalists often describe trends or events while sociologists are interested in explanations and the mechanisms that lead from Point A to Point B.

It sounds like this former student’s call for ideological pluralism in sociology comes from some personal experiences where his opinions did not line up with those of his professors. Yet his essay is a reminder of the (sometimes thin) line between research and politics.

One growing political metaphor: the car

Politico examines President Obama’s usage of the metaphor of driving a car to describe the national political scene and handling of the economy. The metaphor has grown over the months and recently included the first mention of “Slurpee” by a President in a speech.

Politicians commonly use metaphors and symbols in speeches. The car is such a part of American life that people can instantly grab onto the implications. What would be the metaphorical response from Obama’s opponents?

Blagojevich wins round 1

While sitting in the Atlanta airport waiting to return to Chicago, I saw the big news of today live on CNN: Rod Blagojevich wins round 1 as he is convicted on only 1 of 24 counts brought against him by the federal government.

Amazing.

The jurors started speaking tonight. According to the foreman:

But in the end, he said, the “lack of a smoking gun” was too much of a hurdle for jurors to reach more than the one unanimous decision.

And the charge of trying to selling the Senate seat might have been held up by one juror:

[A young juror] said a female juror who was the lone holdout on convicting Blagojevich of attempting to sell the Senate seat “wanted clear-cut evidence, and not everything was clear-cut.”

The court proceedings will continue.

And what does this mean for the State of Illinois, politics, and U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald?

Saving the auto industry in Detroit?

President Obama spoke in Detroit on Friday and The Atlantic examines four viewpoints about whether recent policies helped save the auto industry. Opinions are mixed.

The two more negative opinions are from Detroit journalists.

Chicago vs. Wal-Mart: outcome still in doubt

A news story today from the Chicago Tribune detailing Wal-Mart’s latest offer to build a store in Chicago (it currently has 0 within city limits). Some of the players in the long saga:

1. Wal-Mart. Its latest offer is starting all workers at $8.75 an hour, $0.50 above current minimum wage standards in Chicago. Has been exploring several sites on the South Side for years.

2. Unions. Don’t want Wal-Mart as the company does not allow its workers to unionize. Worried about lower wages.

3. The City. Has primarily been against Wal-Mart because of the wage issue.

4. Those who want cheaper and/or accessible groceries. Several of the neighborhoods Wal-Mart has looked at might be considered “food deserts” (neighborhoods where relatively cheap, nutritious food is not available). Many other companies are not willing to move in while Wal-Mart has expressed interest.

There might be a path to resolution soon – several aldermen now seem willing to support the stories in their wards. This may be particularly timely as Wal-Mart says it would add 12,000 jobs to the city for the next five years if they could build where they want.

Stay tuned.

UPDATE 6/23/10 at 11:10 PM

From the Chicago Tribune: Mayor Daley of Chicago makes “an emotional pitch” for Wal-Mart, Wal-Mart releases a list of benefits for the community, and demonstrators who support Wal-Mart add the vuvuzela to their arsenal.

Quick Review: The Wire

I finished watching the last season of The Wire over the weekend. Quick observations before I provide some links to academics and sociologists commenting on the show, one that several critics have deemed “the best TV show ever.”

1. The City of Baltimore is truly part of the story. Unlike many shows that use a “bland big city” for the background, this show digs deeper into the place.

2. Multi-faceted view of the situation and complicated stories. Each season attempts a slightly different angle including children and the media (seasons 4 and 5). There are consistent characters through all the seasons but each season keeps adding a little more as a new perspective is developed. Not a fast-moving show.

3. Some fascinating characters. Jimmy McNulty – a detective that perhaps only loves his cases. Stringer Bell – a gang leader who is also taking business classes at night to improve his skills. Officer Daniels (who moves up the ranks during the show) unwilling to “juke the stats” to please his bosses. Many more to name.

4. The police are just as deep into the drugs and violence as the gangs. From consistent violence to “Hamsterdam” to cover-ups to “juking the stats” to impressive detective work, the police are not simply geniuses or people who can shoot better. In fact, the police rarely shoot – a problem with many cop shows since most real-life police rarely or never fire a gun in the line of duty.

4a. The politicians are similarly involved. The goal: get as much positive credit for change while minimizing negatives that happen when you are in charge.

5. Somewhat hopeless ending – new people on both sides, the gangs and police, come in, take the place of those before, and similar battles are fought. Some of the kids get out and many do not. A good number of the police are ruined. The politicians try to use whatever they can to get ahead. Money and power are what people want and just their means of pursuing them are different.

6. Sociologically, a lot of the show seemed similar to Sudhir Venkatesh’s books on life on the South side of Chicago: American Project, Off the Books, Gang Leader for a Day.

Some commentary from other sociologists:

1. Sudhir Venkatesh talking about the show with “real thugs”.

2. A short collection of reviews from Racism Review.

3. The Guardian UK summarizes an academic conference on The Wire.

4. Slate.com writing about academic courses on the TV show, including  noted sociologist William Julius Wilson teaching such a course at Harvard.

5. Two sociologists comment in Dissent in 2008 (and participate in a broader discussion) and then expand on their thoughts in City and Community.

I’m sure there is more out there. It is rare to find any media creation that receives praise from so many in providing a realistic portrayal of city life.