Political efficacy is described as, “Faith and trust in government and the belief that one can understand and influence political affairs” (Mutz and reeves). The dearth of political efficacy is reflected in the mobilization numbers of the 2014 senate races. According to the Pew Research Center, only 38% of the voting-eligible population in states with senate elections turned out (Desilver & Van Kessel, 2015). Pew finds that it was the lowest turnout since 1990 even though $1.1 billion was spent, 25% more than the 2010 election (Desilver & Van Kessel, 2015). To be clear, the two numbers do not necessarily indicate causation, and there could be several other factors attributed.
While Republicans are voted mostly by white men, Democrats are voted by other minority races like Blacks and Hispanics, along with higher number of women. Of these, the younger adults tend to be toward Democrats, while middle-aged adults tend to favor the Republicans. This could also be linked to the income and education level, where higher income and education favors the Republican side and the lower, the Democratic side. Marital status has an influence too, where married couples are more toward the Republicans, and singles more toward the Democrats. The regions are distinct too, where Republicans are strongest in the South and Midwest of U.S. apart from Democrat’s power in the Northeast and California.
The popular belief is that the left side of the political spectrum is the more liberal and open-minded to ideas and beliefs. I was one of those people that believed that liberals were the more politically accepting. However, as Kirsten Powers describes in her book, The Silencing: How the Left is Killing Free Speech, this is not always true. Rather, a lot of those people who identify themselves as being liberal, are not really liberal because they actually shut down ideas and the people that go against their own beliefs. According to Powers, there are two types of liberals.
What they had to do was pull power from people and sources from the outside. Since such resources were not handed to them and they were not readily available and didn’t come with the office, this is where there are referred to as the informal powers. These Informal powers differ substantially from one governor to another, rather than from one state to the next. This is because some of the informal powers have to do with the person who holds the office. Each person weather e man or woman who was to be elected governor needed to have certain knowledge, skills, and personality traits that will help in the performance of the job.
In the beginning of Truman’s first term, the Congress had gradually started to become more and more conservative due to the increased liberalism shown by Roosevelt during his term. This became a problem for Truman due to his belief in continuing Roosevelt’s work. During Truman’s second term election, there was division in the democratic party that made it difficult for him to get reelected. During his campaigning, Truman talked against the Republican controlled congress repeatedly. This strategy proved to be effective, considering that the Republicans lost nine Senate seats and seventy-three seats in the House, leading the next congress to be a majority democrat, the complete opposite of the previous congress.
Elections and politics currently believed by many to be focused on spoiler effects, polling, and electability. Some sour victims of these elections have come up with what they believe is a “solution” to politics. This “solution” is known as RCV. Ranked choice voting, or RCV, is a system in which people can choose their first, second, and third choice candidates, and votes will be given accordingly. Regardless of what representatives of RCV may tell you, RCV is unconstitutional, costly, and very time-consuming, which is why allowing voters to rank their choices for elections should not be allowed.
People that want to raise taxes has always been politically dangerous to candidates and public office holders in Texas. Calling for an increase in the role of government also is not advised in Texas. Any person that is running for government is likely to get less
The third political era was that of the Democrats and the Republicans in which they were evenly matched. At first the Republican Party was not a major one, however as time went by the party grew, as they stressed the importance of having a moral conscience, which was seen in the debate over slavery. Due to them winning the confederate cause they became a major power until 1896. It was then in which Democrats who valued the idea of slavery and states rights were slowly losing, and the main battle was over slavery and the confederacy. Since the democrats lost in the Civil War it gave way to the fourth era in politics in which Republicans dominated the Democrats.
The United States currently faces a severe problem with one of their governmental processes. In the democratic system of the United States, politicians are elected by voting from the citizens, in most cases. The problem the United States is facing is that people are no longer voting in elections for officials. This problem is discussed in the article, “In praise of low voter turnout”, written by Charles Krauthammer. The main idea behind this article is that voters are no longer interested in politics, as they were in previous generations.
As it stands now the concept is not constitutional, an altar to the first and twenty-fourth amendments would be required at least, and that would still not guarantee it to pass. Finally, as results have shown it is often difficult or even not worth enforcing. Causing either dishonesty or the entire system to be thrown out the window. Is it truly worth all this time and money to attempt an idea that might blow up in the American people face strictly to help people who are too lazy to head out to the polls? Is it truly that impossible to head out one day for less than an hour, check some names and propositions on a paper and leave?
In advising the Chief Justice, it is obvious that the voting districts should be redrawn for a multitude of reasons. As the system of drawing districts stands, it is highly vulnerable to corruption for the party in power, as they are the ones deciding the districts. Concurrently, those in power are incentivized to maintain their power through any means necessary; which, in a democracy, is obtaining the most votes. Because it is extremely difficult determining whether or not the drawing of a district is preferential to one party over another is, the risk to those in power is minimal while the potential payout is high. Thus, short of any moral reasoning to stop them, the likelihood of someone gaming the design of voting districts is high.
Therefore, the election in America does not prove that it is a democracy country as far as existing gerrymandering. In conclusion, America is not a democracy, and gerrymandering contributes to this statement. Using different methods such cracking and packing makes the elections to be unequal. As the result, voting of American citizens is considered an action that is useless in elect their candidates because state legislators split or gather their partisan members as their
This week’s lesson gave me more clarity on the-the Electoral College. It was confusing at first to hear that the popular vote does not win an election. Bush lost the popular votes, but won the electoral vote in 2000, cleared by the Supreme Court (POLS201). I think it is better for the candidate to worry about the crucial electoral votes than the popular votes. According to POL201 lesson book, former Senator John Kerry in 2004 and Al Gore 2000 had the victories in California, but Bush won both elections.