If party ideology were the only explanation for a president’s stance, we would not have identical approaches from a Democrat, Barack Obama and a Republican, George W. Bush on the same economic issue. Due to this observed discrepancy, it inspires the question: to what extent is a presidents’ stance on an issue a function of his party ideology? Rather than depend on party ideology alone, understanding the presidential stance with an understanding of how the president sees the government as a function of sustaining good economic and social relations between nations. Furthermore, an understanding of how the president thinks about individual rights might be helpful to explaining a stance on an issue. These explanations can be investigated through comparing the president to a Founding Father, or various Founding Fathers’ principles. Using another means of explaining a presidents’ stance, such as the method of matching him with the ideologies of the Founding Fathers’, I hypothesize that including party ideology coupled with Founding Father ideology to explain a president’s stance on an issue will account for deviation from party ideology, and will unite party ideologies together by discovering with Founding Father principles; they fall under common ground and can implement beneficial and impacting policies. My research will involve drawing upon several historical and current primary and secondary sources as I analyze the stances of four presidents on unemployment using their party ideology, but most importantly with Founding Father ideology.
2013-2014 Presidential Fellows
- Procurement is a fundamental element of good governance and is as old as the nation itself. goo.gl/4TioKu… twitter.com/i/web/status/8… 3 weeks ago
- The Manhattan Project highlighted the importance of R&D in maintaining the US military’s tech superiority p 43… twitter.com/i/web/status/8… 3 weeks ago
- CSPC's @Jameskitfield interviews CJCS Dunford - in part 2 he talks Turkey, Iran, Afghan Troop Numbers breakingdefense.com/2017/06/cjcs-d… … 4 weeks ago