Every new outlet has a biased leaning toward either left or right. The problem is that a large majority of viewers are voters and take these biased opinions as objective facts. The ideal voter would question every single thing they hear through the new media and then research to find whether or not what they heard was accurate. Unfortunately, obtaining unbiased information is an extremely difficult task in this day and age making the ideal voter nearly extinct. None-the-less the information age has brought us many different incredible tools that enable quick and easy communication.
The Electoral College system, in our government today, is made up of a winner-take-all system. The winner take all system demonstrates that whichever candidate that receives the most votes wins all of the electoral points and the other candidate receives nothing. The Electoral College system enacts the candidates of both parties to only visit the larger states, in which they know they will most likely receive the most electoral points. This is not technically fair because each state is not getting proper representation. When states disagree, with one candidate’s views on a particular issue, they can swing and vote for the other candidate causing the other candidate to alter their approach to win back the state.
The likelihood of many of them voting is high, and some people want to keep it that way, unlawful as it may be. These illegal votes have been said to be “enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes and congressional elections, (https://ww2.odu.edu/~jrichman/NonCitizenVote.pdf).” Another point of contention will be that the setting up of a system of voter ID will be too costly and difficult, but in the long run, a system of Voter Identification can only benefit our
“The Electoral College was created by the Founders because they did not trust people enough to allow them to directly elect the president.” Since the majority of the American people had limited education and communication, the founders felt the “average voter lacked the information to be an informed, unbiased judge of candidates for presidency.” Therefore when voters cast their ballot, the college reviews the peoples’ choices and then decides which of their preferences are best. (Lenz and Holman, 87) Many people feel that this system is undemocratic because they are not able to directly vote for their candidate and because the winner of the popular vote can lose the electoral vote. This happened in the 2000 presidential election between George
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.
Most American’s don’t realize that the majority of interpersonal communication is non-verbal and very impactful. The power of non-verbal communication can make or break the message that is trying to be communicated. It goes far beyond the words that we are uttering, its about their hand-movements, eye contact, body movements, posture among many other things. It conveys the many intended and unintended messages that we try to portray to others so it is important to fully understand how to properly utilize this tactic. The significance of the Nixon-Kennedy debates ,other than being the first of its kind to be televised, was that in this point of time most people who gave live speeches only did so on radio and many candidates weren’t recognizable outside of their portrait.
It is functioned around making sure the people’s vote does not go to waste. As Turner said in his article, “...most call for the winning candidate to receive a popular plurality (forty percent is often mentioned) and a run-off election if that is not achieved” (414). Run-Off was made so if a vote for a certain candidate became no longer valid, as in they dropped out or got voted out, the vote would still matter and it would go onto the individual 's next suggested candidate. “Wouldn’t it be an intolerable strain to the American political system, giving rise to popular outrage and contempt… that sometime again a man with fewer popular votes than his opponent is the electoral winner? I doubt it…” (Bayh 169).
While we may be considered a democratic society, we do not involve enough of our citizens in the democratic process. Since most people do not vote we are not truly a democracy. If more eligible voters were to vote, it would greatly change how our political system currently works. A broader spectrum of voters would shape policies and decisions differently. The additional voters would aid in more accurately deciding upon what the entirety of society wishes.
Overall, just because you win the Electoral College vote this does not mean that you will also go on to win a majority of the national popular vote as well. The race at this point is still far from over voters still have enough time to change direction and abandon their earlier views towards a particular candidate and the Electoral College vote gives voters an insight on what the race is shaping up to be like towards the final stretch). I believe the main pros and cons of the college electoral vote are the people amongst society play a vital role in deciding who will lead the country. Although the popular vote can be over ruled by the electoral vote the American citizens still have the opportunity to participate and educated themselves on the process of choosing the president. With the Electoral College comes its opposition, who believe that the considerations of the Founders are no longer relevant in today’s political system (Madonna,
Elections at the national, California and local levels are similar in ways, but also differ in many ways. The most common outcome of elections is when the highest polling candidates win. However, elections at the three layers of government are not exactly the same. The national, state and local level elections may be similar in ways but will be different in how they operate these processes. One of the most significant differences between the national, California state and local elections are who is elected to each level.