Both of the above writers lean towards the same idea, the idea that PR-STV can be a cause of friction between an intra-party and major competition. Due to PR-STV there is a rise in the number of smaller governments that might reply on and need the backing of independents rather than to get support from another party in a partnership contract. It also focuses on just the individual candidates instead of parties’ all together and promoting competition between candidates in local constituencies. The role of TD’s is also prevalent within the Irish political system. As Farrell says “There is an evident consensus among deputies that the competition in constituency service has got out of hand” (Farrell, 1985: 14).
Popular vote is very direct; one vote for every person. It’s a common belief among political critics that the popular vote is a more fair system and will encourage a higher number of voter turnout. Under the restrictions of the Electoral College, specifically in lower populated states, some voters could feel an overwhelming sense of support for a specific candidate. This would give the voter the feeling that their vote would carry no meaning and in turn could cause a lower voter turnout. Since higher populated states have more electoral votes, many believe that the lower populated areas will be neglected.
Due to Campaign Contribution Limits, the effects of voters’ personal contributions are the same during elections, which can make it possible for voters to express their opinion accurately. Campaign Contribution Limits are thought as an important mechanism which is used to reduce the impact of special interests and encourage citizens to participate in the elections. Campaign Contribution Limits are able to force candidates to rely on smaller democratic system, which can reduce the values of
Allowing someone to have all the power is dangerous for a nation in the sense that they will be most likely be making decisions to benefit themselves as opposed to the whole country’s needs. Preventing tyranny gives people the opportunity to have some power in what decisions are being
This type of voting could be compared to Cumulative Voting. It would work with each voter having a particular number of positive votes and then also a particular number of negative votes. They would then cast these positive and negative votes towards the different candidates. Positive votes would be calculated and casted the same way but in addition any negative votes casted toward that candidate would lower the candidates total score and therefore would also lower their chance of winning the given election. This type of voting could help to avoid an election where the two final candidates are both highly unfavored, such as the one this November between Trump and
On the other side with the defenders of the Electoral College they believe that the Electoral College system is more fair. "In Defense of the Electoral College" states that it provides a certainty of outcome in that "if the difference of the popular vote is small, then if the winner of the popular vote were deemed winner of the presidential election, candidates would have an insensitive to seek a recount in any state." They also state that swing states are important because "they are likely to be the most thoughtful voters" "and the most thoughtful voters should be the ones to decide the elections" giving their votes importance. They also say that it avoids having no candidate winning a
If one party is portrayed as the enemy, then supporters of smaller parties may root for the other major party to keep them out of Parliament. A two-round system means that parties focus on giving benefits of a government including them, rather than mud-slinging so that they can make it to the second round. Once the two parties in the final-run off are decided, smaller parties can unite in promoting the party which aligns with their views. It allows parties and the electorate to adapt to change and decide who they wish to lead the country. [Ace Project] This stops two key things.
The representatives elected by the people to conduct the affairs of the state with the support of the people. If they do not work well or do not meet the expectations of the people, the representatives may not have again in the next election. In this way, people do not need to revolt when wants change. That means the wishes of the public is the supporter of the parliamentary government and not based on fear of the authorities. Democracy stands on consensus and not on power; the citizens have the opportunity to take part actively in the
Much effort has been put into analyzing voting behavior and patters in previous elections in an effort to predict their own voter base and those social groups they could concentrate their efforts on and those groups that would appear to be a lost cause and therefore a waste of time in terms of money spent and time invested in targeting as potential voters. The use of emotional appeals in political campaigns to increase support for a candidate or decrease support for a challenger is a widely recognized practice and a common element of any campaign strategy. Campaigns often seek to instill positive emotions such as enthusiasm and hopefulness about their candidate among party bases to improve turnout and political activism while seeking to raise fear and anxiety about the
Other hand it is also the emphasises the dependence other forces in society like politics and money may considered hare as an example. From this second point of view, the forms of mass media are an outcome of historical change a reflection and consequence of political liberalisation and industrialisation and a response to demands for servicing from other social institutions. Mass Society Theory Mass society theory emphasises the inter-dependence of institutions that exercise power and thus the integration of the media into the sources of social power and authority. Content in the media is likely to serve the interest of political and economic power holders and although the media cannot be expected to offer a critical or alternative definition of the world, their tendency will be to assist in the accommodation of the dependent public to their
While having electors in each state, it makes the voting process easier for the government. Most of the time, unless the vote counts are very close, there will not need to be a recount. Using electors to vote for the popular choice of the state, keeps it simple and easy with fewer people to account for. In an article that agrees with the College, they express, “The Electoral College guarantees certainty to the outcome of the presidential election” (The Electoral College: Top 3 Pros and Cons). This is very important to understand because there is no debate over electoral votes.
One advantage is that it eliminates victory based on solely on populations. This gives power to states no matter what size rather than the population of the state. If the Electoral College was not in place this will lead to campaign solely on the big states rather than all. The Electoral College will continue to create and maintain a two party system. It allows for some continuity and stability for the current government.
It would be extremely difficult to add a constitutional amendment and remove the electoral college, and the current electoral college disproportionately represents some, thus some sort of reform is necessary to maintain the peace. According to the USA Today’s editorial board, “one idea worth considering is to shift away from winner-take-all in each state to a proportional allocation of electors based on statewide vote totals.” This election method would make all states like Nebraska and Maine, where electoral votes may be divided amongst parties. In using this system, the popular vote would be more important, but would not be the ultimate deciding factor of the election, essentially combining the arguments for the two opposing sides. The number of electoral votes for each state should not change, as that would mean the population of congress would have to change. Since a state’s number of electoral votes is representative of its house members and senate members, the way electoral votes are awarded should be changed.
It is very difficult for a successful referendum as of only 8 out of the 44 have been approved. At the end of the constitution it states that there can be an alteration only by the citizens of Australia. There is a four step process to reform the constitution. The first step is that the Australian citizens need to deliberate on the change. Next, the altered bill will be given to the Commonwealth Parliament for approval.
Well, that’s when the House of Representatives comes in at. They will select the president according to each state delegation only having one vote. If there is not enough votes to select a vice president, then the Senate comes in and each senator will have only one vote. As you can tell, voting is very important. As the republic evolved, the electoral college system did as well.