Interview on Death Penalty Essay Example

I interviewed three people of seemingly different backgrounds, in regards to race, career path, age, and political party placement. These three individuals greatly correlated with research found based on opinions on controversial political topics, in relation to the factors listed above. I found that in the relationship between “Interviewee One” and “Interviewee Two”, age greatly contributed to almost all aspects of their political beliefs. “Interviewee One’s” political standpoints matched with different data obtained by Pew Research. Major factors contributing to this person’s ideals include race, gender, age. “Interviewee Two’s” results were predicted accurately by multiple polling sources, including pewresearch.org, americansurverycenter.org, and new.gallup.com. After an analysis of the responses from “Interviewee Two” and “Interviewee Three”, I found that although they had the most drastic superficial differences, these being race, age, and gender, their responses were almost symmetrical. While some had striking similarities, other factors offered a completely opposing perspective from the other, those that had little to no relating characteristics to each other, harmonized in regards to political beliefs. 

“Interviewee One '' presented as a white male, age 55, and identified with the Republican Party. His results correlated greatly with those depicted by multiple polling sources, specifically pewresearch.org. These results being that 53%-42% of those identifying with the Republican Party, are white. Also, pewresearch.org depicts that 56% of the Republican Party are ages 55 and older, which directly relates to “Interviewee One”. This individual held the most conservative ideals in comparison to two other participants. However, while “Interviewee One” related most in terms of superficial characteristics to “Interviewee Two'' their responses to the political topics given, contrasted each other immensely. These two individuals were two decades apart, this piece of information feeds into the statistics that support age contributing to a major divide in regards to political standpoint. According to pew research center.org, only 9% of those who are 30-49 years old, align themselves as a far-right conservative, or “Steadfast conservatives''. “Interviewee One '' seemed to have very little leighway in terms of political issues, and even appeared to support more extreme conservative ideologies for a select few of these topics. For example, “Interviewee One” supported the death penalty and beleives that more crimes should be eligibile for this punishment. One topic that “Interviewee One” aligned in agreement with the other two participants was the separation of church and state. All interviewees supported the belief that the government and religion should never cross, as the result would be chaos. However, “Interviewee One” tied their disdain for same-sex marriage to their own religious beliefs, which appeared to be a contradictory statement. Pew Research Center shows that the support for same-sex marriage within the Republican Party is almost split in half, with 47% in favor and 48% against it. It’s also interesting to note that the only interviewee identifying with the Republican Party was the least educated in terms of global warming, this places “Interviewee One” in the minority of their party, because 65% of those placing themselves in the Republican Party believe the government should be doing more to subdue climate change. My observation of “Interviewee One” solidified multiple polls conducted by various websites, and encouraged the idea that age is a considerable factor in the diverse political opinions of people, because although “Interviewee One” and “Interviewee Two” were the most similar in terms of base-line factors, they were the most divided between the participants.

The second interviewee was a 58-year old, African American female that identified with the Democratic Party. She plans on voting in this coming midterm election, like the two other participants. In terms of abortion, she believes that a woman should have the right to make decisiions for own body, but there should be restrictions in terms of when you can terminate the pregnancy, she thought 3 months should be the limit. When inquired about the death penalty, she was strongly against it and believed that it was “Tit for Tat.” This places her in the minority of her party’s stance, because 58% of those aligned with the Democratic Party support the death penalty. (According to polling research completed by new.gallup.com) Her response contrasted greatly with the first interviewee, who thought the death penalty should be used more frequently. Her perspective of the separation of church and state matched the responses of the other two interviewees, that they should never cross. In regards to global warming, she supports more effort and funding being put into subduing the effects caused by it. This placed her in a smaller bracket based on her age group, as those who are “Gen X’ and older, lean more towards less funds for global warming causes. With the topic of gun control, her response had similar aspects to the first interviewee, with both aligning problems related to guns circling back to mental health, or “It’s the person, not the gun.” However, she was in support of stricter gun laws, while “Interviewee One’ thought they were strict enough. This circumstance was one of the only situations where somewhat of a middle ground was found between these two dissimilar interviewees. Her beliefs for immigration were influenced more with sympathy than the first interviewee, and while the third interviewee was for it, his response was persuaded by the positive effects of immigration for the economy. She believed that immigration is difficult enough as it is, and supported those coming to the United States for a better life. This interviewee had the most physical differences between the other two interviewees, while synchronizing in beliefs with one and dividing completely with the other.

Interviewee Three was a 35-year old, cacuasian male that identified with the Democratic Party. He plans on voting this midterm election, which is a factor all three interviewees agreed on. He believes that abortion was solved 30 years ago with Roe Vs. Wade and that the 3rd trimester laws are reasonable.  Unlike “Interviewee One”, he was firmly against the death penalty and beliebed that the system is “outdated” and rigged against poor people, because those that are wealthy can escape the death penalty with a fee. Also, the known fact of innocent people being killed by the death penalty leaned him farther against it. All interviewees agreed that there should be a separation of religion and government. In regards to global warming, he believes that corporations are the biggest contributors to its effects, and stricter rules should be in place to subdue the outcome. “Interviewee Three” was the most knowledgeable about this topic and unlike “Interviewee Two” put more blame on large companies. He had the most interesting opinion of all three interviewees on gun control, believing that revoking gun rights is used as fear for votes. He did not believe in a complete ban on guns, but supported stricter gun regulations. This places him in the majority of the Democratic Party, with 83% in support of stricter gun laws, according to Pew Research Center. In terms of immigration, “Interviewee Three” was supportive for different reasons than “Interviewee Two.” While she leaned more on the sympathetic side, he viewed immigration as a “net positive for our country.” He was also in complete support of asylum seekers. Aligning with “Interviewee Two”, he believed that social security should be the government's responsibility, due to the fact that they’re “taking money out already.” He is in complete support of same-sex marriage and mentioned attending same-sex weddings and planning to attend more. This put him in the majority with his party as 83% of Democrats support same-sex marriage. “Interviewee Three” believed that those who make the most amount of money should be placed in a higher tax bracket and pay a higher percentage because they benefit the most. This interviewee agreed on every topic with “Interviewee Two” although they had the most superficial differences. These being over two decades apart in age, race, and gender. He opposed almost all opinions on these issues with “Interviewee One”, who was the most similar to him in superficial factors. 

In closing, there were slight differences even with those in the same party. Age, gender, and race seemed to contribute immensely to certain issues. The majority of the opinions matched the demographics discussed in class, but there were few exceptions with a couple of occasions. The interviewees seemed to either completely agree with one another or completely disagree, which was expected with their political party differences. It was interesting to view the two most superficially differed interviewees harmonize in their beliefs, and the two most similar completely contrast one another.