Washington Post Argument Analysis

505 Words3 Pages
The main argument of this piece written by Danny Hayes of the Washington Post suggests when your team wins that can translate into a higher approval rating for the president of the United States. The researchers used evidence from a study that was done last year at the NCAA football national championship. The researchers got a sample of about 200 students that were from both Oregon and Ohio State. The survey given out asked for what they thought the president’s approval rating was on a seven point scale. Half of the students in this survey had to fill out the survey two days before the game and half had to fill out the survey after the completion of the game. The results were pretty significant as there was shift in the approval ratings of the president. Ohio State won the championship and the research showed a increase in Obama’s approval rating from before and then after. The research concluded that before the game Obama had a 4.18 rating and after it was up to 4.63, this among Ohio state…show more content…
For instance, we could look at the idea of getting a new puppy. For example when you get a new puppy peoples moods would be happier than if you didn’t have a new baby puppy. You could look at it like this; if you have a puppy you will be feeling happy and satisfied. Therefore, you would like the current political system and be happy with the work of our president. On the contrary if you don’t have happiness in your life you will probably be less likely to be satisfied with the president. People with no comfort or positive things in their life with usually have a negative aspect of all things politics. This is also why family is so important in people’s lives. It could be said, that people without a family support system have a tough time making positive decisions and liking the world and country their living
Open Document