Thursday, October 25, 2007
FC #5
There is only 2 teams that are doing better then my team. I think its because they created their account earlier than mine. Also, I noticed that their senators are well known senators. Mostly Democrats, having good attendance rate. Another factors are, their supporters have good rate on almost everything. Overall everyone in other 2 teams have good overall rating.
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
FC#4
I trade Barack Obama for Tom Coburn because Obama was getting lazy.I noticed that his attendance were dropping, I also wanted to try a Republican to see how he will perform.
Saturday, October 6, 2007
Blog post # 3
Part A: Pg. 261
1. It's 2004 Presidential Election Turnout by Social Group. The chart show the race, age, education, gender, ethnicity, and income.
2. People voted more with higher education, how older they are, and higher income. I could see the pattern going up toward older and wealthy people, while younger and less income criteria tend to vote less. I could conclude that older people have more interest in community then youngers because they have more money, properties, and have bigger family.
3. Charts by state by state could be useful.
Pg. 268
1. It's a poll of what Democrats and Repulicans delegating to each topic.
2. I could clearly see that Repulicans are towards conservative and Democrats towards liberal. Repulicans want sorely standing alone while Democrats want to solve problems with other nations. I conclude that Repulicans wants to control while Democrats wants to be control by.
3.Chart showing information about their age, sex, education, etc.
Pg.274
1. It's who voted for who on Presidential race in 2004 by social group with age, income, education, etc.
2. Democrats usually voted for Democrat, also Repulicans vice versa. Minorities, lower-income voted more to Kerry. Jewish voted for Democrat. Once again people tend to follow what group they're in.
Part. B
Voting rights have been changed many times. Looking at the charts for the consideration. People with education voted more, also age contribute to this factors. More interest and power they had tend to voted. Democrats for the poors, Repulicans for the riches. People with no interest or ideas should not vote because every vote counts. They should not vote base on what they like, they should understand what they want and follow that pattern to vote.
1. It's 2004 Presidential Election Turnout by Social Group. The chart show the race, age, education, gender, ethnicity, and income.
2. People voted more with higher education, how older they are, and higher income. I could see the pattern going up toward older and wealthy people, while younger and less income criteria tend to vote less. I could conclude that older people have more interest in community then youngers because they have more money, properties, and have bigger family.
3. Charts by state by state could be useful.
Pg. 268
1. It's a poll of what Democrats and Repulicans delegating to each topic.
2. I could clearly see that Repulicans are towards conservative and Democrats towards liberal. Repulicans want sorely standing alone while Democrats want to solve problems with other nations. I conclude that Repulicans wants to control while Democrats wants to be control by.
3.Chart showing information about their age, sex, education, etc.
Pg.274
1. It's who voted for who on Presidential race in 2004 by social group with age, income, education, etc.
2. Democrats usually voted for Democrat, also Repulicans vice versa. Minorities, lower-income voted more to Kerry. Jewish voted for Democrat. Once again people tend to follow what group they're in.
Part. B
Voting rights have been changed many times. Looking at the charts for the consideration. People with education voted more, also age contribute to this factors. More interest and power they had tend to voted. Democrats for the poors, Repulicans for the riches. People with no interest or ideas should not vote because every vote counts. They should not vote base on what they like, they should understand what they want and follow that pattern to vote.
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
FC #3
Out of my Fantasy Congress teams, upper senators are doing quite better then lower senators.
I think that because my upper senators have more legislation,co-sponser and news. Upper senators had more sponsoreds and cosponsoreds then lower senators. I don't think attendance isn't really matter because senator Obama have lower attendance then any others but, still manage to get some great points. However, senator Obama is a well known senator that is why that doen't really matter either. For the rookies and supporters they don't really have that much legislation, sponser, cosponser, or on news, so that they don't really excess senators points. One thing I notices about upper and lower senators followers, they don't do well if they have low attendance points.
I think that because my upper senators have more legislation,co-sponser and news. Upper senators had more sponsoreds and cosponsoreds then lower senators. I don't think attendance isn't really matter because senator Obama have lower attendance then any others but, still manage to get some great points. However, senator Obama is a well known senator that is why that doen't really matter either. For the rookies and supporters they don't really have that much legislation, sponser, cosponser, or on news, so that they don't really excess senators points. One thing I notices about upper and lower senators followers, they don't do well if they have low attendance points.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)