PHOTO: Reese Witherspoon, Ryan Phillipe Reunite
25 Funniest Tweets From Parents This Week
Obama wins Scholastic Kids Election poll
Filed under: Preschoolers, Big Kids, Tweens, Teens, In The News, Day Care & Education
Every four years since 1940, Scholastic Magazine has asked young readers to pick the next president. In all but two of those 'elections', the kids have chosen the candidate who went on to win the presidency (they failed to predict Harry Truman in 1948 and John F. Kennedy in 1960). Because of that impressive record, some people put a lot of stock in the results of Scholastic's election results. So, who did about 250,000 pre-K through 12th grade students choose for our next president this time? Democrat Barack Obama. And not just by a little bit, either. Obama got 57% of the vote compared to Republican John McCain's 39%.
Now, you might be wondering just what do these kids know that would allow them to correctly predict our next president 88% of the time. Rebecca Bondor, editor in chief of Scholastic's classroom magazine, credits family influence. "Kids do listen to their parents, and they discuss politics in their families," she says . But she also says that with today's easy access to information, many kids are forming their own opinions.
As for the remaining 4% of the vote, those went to write-in candidates. Hilary Clinton got most of those, but Ralph Nader, Ron Paul, Stephen Colbert and "my dad" also garnered some votes.
So, there you have it. Like it or not, the kids have spoken. Do you think they've got it right?
Your<span>Voice</span>
Ask Us Anything About Parenting
TheTalkies:RelatedVideos
-
How People React to the Brady Kids Today
The Brady kids talk about how new generations of kids are discovering The Brady Bunch, and how people respond to them on the street.
-
I Was A Fat Kid
People who were obese as kids either embrace or lose the weight, but what effect does childhood obesity have on people as adults?
-
Adam Sandler: People Have Always Liked Me
Before hosting a live chat to commemorate reaching 30 million fans of Facebook, Adam Sandler, alongside Andy Samberg, told ET's Nancy O'Dell that he has always been a popular guy. "People always have liked me--since I [was] a kid," Sandler said. "When I was about four...I had more friends than the other kids and my mother would always tell me to give some of my friends to my brother 'cause he had none."
VIDEO: Jennifer Aniston, Adam Sandler and Brooklyn Decker 'Just Go With It'
-
Teaching Your Kids About Charity: Mommy Reboot
It can be challenging to explain to your little ones that there are people in the world who aren't as healthy or as fortunate as they are. Teaching your kids about charity and giving back isn't always easy, but I've got a few sites and things you can check out to try to help out people in need.
SitesWeLove
- Site Map
- |
- Staff
- |
- Terms of Service
- |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Trademarks
- |
- Advertise With Us
- |
- About Our Ads
- |
- AOL Downloads
- |
- Contact Us
- |
© Copyright 2012 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Aol Family
ReaderComments (Page 2 of 2)
10-19-2008 @ 7:28AM
Juniper said...Thank you Teacher for your comments. What scares me most about SKL and people like her is that their belief system is one that is shaped by complete selfishness, is thoroughly judgmental and lacks understanding of what it means to be part of a society. Some people don't realize that each person is somewhat dependent on the actions of someone else, directly or indirectly.
Reply
10-19-2008 @ 11:19AM
SKL said...Juniper: "Complete selfishness?" You don't know me at all. I have donated hundreds of thousands of dollars, and thousands of volunteer hours, to those less fortunate - many, many times the amount I've spent on myself. I have come up from poverty on my own, withno help from the government or anyone else, and worked all my life in the "real world," from being a factory worker and nurses' aide to being a tax attorney and CPA, so yeah, I think I have some understanding of life. I just happen to believe that Obama's policies will only lead to more problems for the average American, and hence eventually all Americans. Historical experience backs me up. Maybe I just shouldn't care, because I don't need any more money anyway. My house is paid off. It's not for myself that I'm concerned.
Teacher, I know what it's like to study for teaching, because that was my major in my first three years of college. What sets me apart is that I borrowed $85K to continue school until I had my law degree and MBA from a prestigious university, then proceeded to work an average of 12+ hours a day over the next 18 years (so far), earning my CPA license and other credentials and skills on the side. This was done in addition to a continuous schedule of volunteer work and family involvement. Why should I not make more money now? I risked more by staying in school longer and taking a lot of debt with no certainty of being able to support myself while paying it all off. My first job after grad school paid $32,500 and my student loan payments were $1,100 per month, and I paid the same taxes as someone making $32,500 with no student debt (there were no tax breaks for education in those days). All these years I've paid a lot more taxes than those who were done with school earlier and work a shorter day. I continue to pay a lot more tax than most Americans gross. What I can't stand is that people like you and Juniper think it's never enough. You think I don't deserve any return on my risk and investment. So in other words, you think nobody should bother to continue their education in this country. As a teacher, you ought to know that without any incentive other than wanting to help those less ambitious, more kids and young adults won't bother to apply themselves to their educations, and hopefully you would have a problem with that. I do.
You people are so blinded by your own beliefs. You really think conservatives don't care about others. You are stupid.
10-19-2008 @ 3:57PM
Jenni said...SKL,
No need to defend yourself. Some people don't think that those who have money will, when left to do so, be charitable without being forced. They think people need to be forced to take care of others. What they fail to see, is that people actually are good and caring when not forced to do so. What they fail to see is that when we have a little extra, we are always willing to help out.
What they don't want to admit is that we actually WANT to help others. No, the selfishness comes in when they think they need to force you to help them. When you choose to do what you want with your own hard earned money, that's selfish. However, if you are forced to give that money to others, then that's charitable and you are no longer selfish. (yes that last line is said with full sarcasim).
10-19-2008 @ 2:47PM
Teacher said...SKL - I think you totally deserve to make more money for putting in your extra work, I just don't think you should look down on me for not making as much money as you.
I know conservatives care about others, my parents are super republican, super conservative and super caring.
It was just in your previous post you came off as saying people who do not make $250 or more are stupid, uneducated morons that don't deserve anything. You made your choices and I made mine. Making enough money to get by and occasinally get something I want works for me.
I agree handouts do not work for everyone and I think you might have some misinformation about Obama's actual plan. I see from some of your other posts you actually think he hangs out with terrorists (even though he was 8 years old at the time), so I know there is no way I can convince you of changing your mind. I completely respect that you are supporting McCain and I wish you could respect that I am not. Obama is not perfect, I do not agree with him continuing the voucher plan (it has been proven not to work) and there are some other things I don't agree with. I do my best to make my situation the best it can be. I make good financial choices and people like me, so I guess we will never see eye to eye.
Reply
10-19-2008 @ 3:16PM
Juniper said...SKL,
I never said that you shouldn't reap the rewards of hard work by earning as much money as you want to. I have nothing against wealth. However, you seem to think the government should reward you by taking away from others. I guess that kind of wealth redistribution is ok with you because you think people who don't earn as much as you are lazy. Not everyone can earn $250K or more. There aren't even enough jobs in our economy that pay that much, even for people with your level of education. In your posts you equate wealth with drive and intelligence, and that is where I think you are stupid, to borrow your opinion of me. In addition to CPA's and lawyers (the latter of which there are too many of), society requires teachers, nurse aides, factory workers, ditch diggers, etc. Most of these jobs pay less and sometimes people in these jobs need assistance. A lot of these people are intelligent and work hard. There isn't room at the top of the income ladder for everyone. That's simple economics.
If you make $250K and under Obama pay 39% instead of 36%(three percent is the increase in taxes people earning over $250k will see) in fed taxes and that hurts your finances, you need a new budget. If you pay more and it doesn't hurt your budget, but bothers you because someone *you* deemed less deserving simply because they don't earn as much as you do, well then you are being selfish and greedy.
And I never said that conservatives as a whole are not giving people. I know generous conservatives exist, just like selfish, overbearing liberals do. I just think the policies of the current GOP are shaped by greed, fundamentalism and mismanagement. A lot of notable Republicans agree, note Colin Powell and Christopher Buckley's endorsements of Obama.
Reply
10-19-2008 @ 5:09PM
SKL said...Once again, my post that you all are responding to was not about the $250K limit. And once again, it's $200K for singles. And once again, I don't believe Obama will stop there. It's his principle that because I have more, I need to let someone else decide how to spend it, that I find wrong.
Why should I trust Obama to use my hard-earned money for a purpose that doesn't offend my principles?
I don't give to certain "umbrella" charities because I know that they will use part of the money for services that counsel women to have abortions they might otherwise choose not to have. It's my money. I don't want my hard work to pay for more dead babies. When I'm up working after midnight most nights, I ought to be able to decide where the results go.
I mainly support literacy programs, childhood education programs, and destitute women, children, and handicapped and elderly people in developing countries where they would otherwise be underserved. I cofounded a charity to further some of these purposes. Before I donate, I make sure I personally know the people who are running the place or someone very involved in it, and visit personally if possible. I make sure that the dollars I give are going to benefit the people I believe deserve, and will benefit in the long run from, my help. I follow up to see exactly what the results were and re-evaluate what I will give in the following year. I also offer my expertise to help the organizations to run more effectively without incurring more costs. I know that my giving is helping people and therefore I can feel good about it.
Now, if it was up to Washington DC to decide whom should be helped by the money I don't need to spend on myself, it would go to programs I don't agree with and to people who wouldn't benefit as much and to increased administrative requirements which hurt more than they help. You may not agree with that, but see, it's MY money we're talking about, not yours. If you think Obama is the guy to decide where yours goes, you know, there is a line on your tax return where you can pay more than you owe, so you have that option already. But I should be able to decide how my earnings get redistributed.
As for my budget, Juniper, I support myself and my 2 kids, and I spend about $12,000 per year doing so. I have no personal budget issues. That's not what it's about at all.
Oh, and as for there being "too many lawyers," all I can say is, there are obviously way too many liberals, but we all have to put up with you. Now, I would agree there are too many lawyers in DC, Obama among them.
Reply
10-19-2008 @ 5:14PM
SKL said...And by the way, Juniper, what do you mean when you say I want the government to reward me by taking away from others? I think everyone should get a tax cut. But it's hard to cut income taxes much on people who don't pay much or any.
And by the way, when you call someone "completely selfish," you can't really expect them not to insult you back.
Personally I think you are just jealous. But like Teacher said, I made my choices, you made yours. I do NOT look down on your choices, unless they involve demanding my money. That's not the point. The point is, everyone needs to live with the results of THEIR choices, not benefit from the results of MINE. If I was looking down on everyone making less than me, that would include my entire family and most of my friends. No, this is all about choices, each of which I respect, to the extent they don't infringe on others.
Reply
10-19-2008 @ 6:05PM
Juniper said...SKL:
I knew eventually you would say I am jealous, because people who think the way you do always say that to people who believe what I believe. Just to be clear, I am not jealous. I am not a jealous person. I am quite happy with my life, even if my family doesn't make 200K a year. Money doesn't equal happiness. Also, I didn't call you selfish, just your belief system. You personally attacked me by calling me stupid. A big difference.
Government will demand your money no matter what. You and I just have different wishes as to how that money is spent. You prefer that you pay fewer federal taxes and that what money you do pay go to supporting things like this immoral, misguided war and silly abstinence education, which is a proven failure. I would prefer my government spend my tax dollars improving infrastructure in *this* country, not Iraq, to provide things like improved health care (so that people don't clog our emergency rooms, which uses tax dollars wastefully), education funding (such as student aid so people don't end up 85K in debt like you did), funding for small businesses and the closing of loopholes that allow large corporations to shirk their tax responsibilities. Heck, if large corporations didn't have as many tax shelters as they do, individuals could probably have larger tax cuts and we would still see improved services for our citizens. I honestly don't think that will happen no matter who's in charge because our government is owned by lobbyists, although I do see reform to that more with Obama than McCain.
And while in your opinion, there may be too many liberals, I feel there can never be too many. All the things that you take for granted, such as clean air and water, food and workplace safety, are there because liberal-minded people fought for them.
10-19-2008 @ 5:52PM
notfooled said...SKL - I'm not even going to read your long rambling post. You stopped
me at the 2nd paragraph when you ask "Why should I trust Obama to use
my hard-earned money for a purpose that doesn't offend my principles?"
Your President Bush has been using my hard-earned money for 6 long
years for a misguided war that offends my principles (and at this
point, most Americans, Dem or Repub) to the very core!!
No one gets to pick and choose where their tax dollars go; yours is
an absolutely ridiculous concept. And if you can't stand the thought
that a few of your tax dollars over and above the threshold of $250k
might actually go to someone less educated, or god-forbid, less
"hard-working" than you (because of course everyone knows that a
pencil-pushing CPA works much harder than a construction worker, or
ditch-digger, or factory worker or housekeeper or trashman, right?),
then I think the elitist, judgemental, condescending, and devisive
pair of McCain/Palin is just the right team for you.
Thank goodness, Nov 4th will show that most of America does not agree with you. Most of us are sick and tired of the past eight years of increasing inequities of wealth accumulation. It has damaged our country to the core. Because the true core of this country is our hard-working lower-to-middle class, upon who's back most (not all) rich people have built their wealth base. Many people who make over $250k (and I am one of them) are fine with the concept of paying a little more in taxes in order to make this country a better place for everyone. Obama has a vision of optimism and great possibilities for our economy/war-torn country - McCain/Palin just see "haves" and "have nots", and they want the power to stay with the "haves" and screw the rest.
Reply
10-20-2008 @ 12:44AM
SKL said...I don't want Bush or Obama or McCain to spend my money. That's why I don't want to pay more taxes.
And yeah, I do work harder than most people, including factory workers and such. When I was 20, I worked 12-hour days on a factory production line while also running a retail business for 36 hours and taking 20 college credits. At 30, I worked 10-hour days in my regular job and nights on the production line of a factory I co-owned. I've usually had more than one job, and have often done work that is of the "heavy" physical kind. I know what hard work is. Being able to go home after 8 hours of it and shower is a lot nicer than having to work many 24-hour days and travel every other week and communicate with suits in multiple languages and clean up other people's costly mistakes and market other people's BS ideas. I'm not sure why you people think putting down CPAs and lawyers furthers your arguments.
As for corporations, I worked in corporate and international tax for 13 years. The US used to have a low tax rate, but now it has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. The dems like to talk about all these "loopholes," but you can look at publicly-available data and see that the average tax our companies are paying is pretty close to the ordinary, high tax rate. So companies are moving away from the US as fast as they can, and many foreign countries who could set up shop here would rather ship imports instead. You want to increase corporate taxes even more? Great. What's the plan for the job loss that will result? Unilaterally renegotiate freakin' NAFTA? Yeah, whatever.
As for your wonderful desire to get rid of inequalities. I agree there are inequalities. The fact that I have to fork over about 25x the amount of tax the average American pays, and I receive far fewer services than the average American receives, is unequal. The fact that I spent more time on homework as a kid, that's unequal. The fact that I invested more in my education, that's unequal. The fact that I have always worked an average of 50% more hours than other Americans, that's unequal. The fact that my kids and I don't qualify for the same services, subsidies, and tax breaks as the average American - that's unequal. That we have to pay for stuff we'd get for free if I worked fewer hours. That if I want to give $1K to someone who needs help, I have to earn about $1.7K to make that possible. Obama's "plan" is to make all these things even more unequal. Yet you think I should be more concerned about the inequality that occurs when somebody chooses to get high instead of focusing on their education or their job. I guess we have a little difference of opinion.
10-20-2008 @ 7:51AM
notfooled said...SKL - I think you have more than a difference in opinion - I think you have a warped sense of reality!! You're telling me you worked 20hrs/day, 7 days a week? That's how your supposed jobs/school add up. And even if you did work close to those hours, you're not the only one to have to work hard to pay for school. Obviously, something happend in your childhood that soured you on the "average American" (you refer to having to do extra homework as a kid, and you're still refering to that experience to shape your politics?!). Sounds like you've owned a business, a factory, and are now some kind of business consultant. You claim to pay 25x the taxes of the "average American" - then you must be very well off, or a terrible tax accountant. You claim you and your kids don't receive the same "services" as "average Americans" - are you referring to social services? Because yes, those are for people who need a lift up, to try and get on the track of an "average American". They're not meant to be a personal merit award to Ms. SKL who had to do extra homework as a kid. To summarize, you sound just like a lot of the bitter, resentful Republicans who can't see the vision of a better America that Obama is trying to make come true. You sound so unhappy - why wouldn't you want to try something new?
Reply
10-20-2008 @ 2:44PM
SKL said...Notfooled (though I'm not so sure about that), I didn't say I have a problem with the fact that what I've put forth to make a living not equal to what others have put forth. Why must unequal always mean bad? I worked harder since KG because I wanted to reap the rewards. I'm really glad I did. I'm just sick of the attitude that as long as my rewards are bigger than anyone else's, I have to relinquish them.
As long as everyone has food to eat and some kind of roof over their head, and the opportunity to work for more, what is the problem if I have a few bucks besides?
People in this generation think that equality of possessions is some kind of high ideal. Actually, nothing could be more counter-productive. I've always had less "stuff" than the average working-class American. Today, I own $50K worth of house, a 6-year-old gas-efficient car, and a piano that I bought used 18 years ago. Who cares whether it's as much as anyone else has? My kids and I are not hungry or freezing, and I know where I'll be sleeping tomorrow; that's all I care about as far as material stuff goes. It's really a shame how much materialism is hyped up and used for political purposes. It is a root cause for a lot of violence, depression, and self-destructive behaviors that only compound people's material problems. This is an almost embarrassingly rich country; our welfare recipients and hardened prisoners have far more than the middle class in most other countries. Yet they are blinded by all this political crap about "equality" and they think they don't have "enough."
So what if I can "afford" to pay more taxes? Do you all realize how idiotic that "reasoning" is? Should I also lick my neighbor's feet because I "can"? Shall I make a list of all the things people should do for me because they "can"? How about the neighbor down the street mow my lawn (on his own dime) because, unlike me, he has a lawn mower and Saturdays off? Mr. Obama, doesn't that sound like a good idea?
10-20-2008 @ 4:37PM
David said...Kid minds are contaminated with liberals media and most of them under public shool system in which teachers and parents are wrongly explains to the kids about the candidates so this year Kids poll is NOT reflect the true property of the candidacy but mostly through anger and irresponsible
Reply
10-20-2008 @ 5:40PM
notfooled said...SKL - You think a family of 4 making $40k/yr cares about luxury items (that's approx the level of family income at which no Fed tax is due)? You are so jaded and unhappy that it affects your ability to debate with any reason arguements at all.
Reply
10-21-2008 @ 8:16PM
DEE JAY said...I Hope Those kids are RIGHTTT
~OBAMA 08' ~
Reply
11-03-2008 @ 4:14PM
WoowZa said...Wow,
Okay- How about agreeing to disagree! Regardless of whoever wins I hope we can come together as a nation and support the new president. After the Wall Street melt down one message that both candidates had was that things need to change.
My husband and I make a little over 100,000 dollars a year and consider ourselves very fortunate. We both have college degrees. I didn't think it was okay that the Corporate Heads walked off with Millions while the pension funds were depleted of the workers. I think a little common sense is what is needed, perhaps a little oversight to keep things fair. Just my humble opinion.
Reply