As citizens of the United States, we share a common vision in which our nation provides the highest quality of life to its people. This dream, coupled with our democratic values, explains why presidential elections are so crucial; they are opportunities for the people to elect a president who will maintain justice, welfare, and voice for them. Due to the significance of a president’s leadership, it is no surprise that he/she must possess high expertise and work integrity. Yet, with the loose prerequisites tied to presidential eligibility, many citizens are worried that the selected candidate will not inhibit those qualities. In the wake of the approaching presidential election, this worry has induced public debate, as citizens ask: should there …show more content…
To start, one effect of imposing additional presidential requirements is the hindrance of certain groups of people to run for office, which is unjust because it limits opportunity. For example, if requirements concerning education level or political involvement were established, be it that certain candidates are shut out from even the possibility of serving. This systematic exclusion of individuals, regardless of the intent, is unfair. It sets a tone of elitism, suggesting that certain regulations validate someone as “good enough” to even be considered for important roles. Moreover, this systematic exclusion emphasizes segregation of groups: those who possess a certain trait and those who do not. This line of division not only creates animosity within different groups but also opposes the idea of equal opportunity for all. Therefore, while proponents of heightened presidential requirements argue that presidential candidates already have socially implied requirements (such as obtaining a certain educational degree or possessing some expanse of political experience) and that additional requirements will induce no major change in political dynamics, such a notion is inherently damaging because it systematically stops certain people from running. While intended to produce societal welfare, increased presidential requirements leave an elitist
This source emphasizes how the society views elections when it comes to Americans. Donald R. Kinder, Philip E. Converse Collegiate Professor of Political Science, professor of psychology, and research professor in the Center for Political Studies at the University of Michigan and Allison Dale-Riddle, doctoral candidate in political science at the University of Michigan does astonishing at arguing, that although “separate but equal” ended by the help of Gunnar Myrdal over 60 years ago that race continuously play a major role in elections. The book allows readers to question how race affected Barack Obama difficulty to win the election. Kinder and Riddle expresses how race is an important factor that should not be over looked by the society regarding presidency. Both authors’ does exceptional at declaring that race is a main factor that affect people votes and how Obama was almost eliminated as a candidate from winning presidency.
Presidential election brings a lot of attention to candidates running for the office and public is listening and watching every move they are making. Public is also analyzing their thought process. News and media is analyzing their moves and trying to break it down for public. This year’s presidential election is nothing less and candidates have been under fire. San Jose Editorial group is also breaking down stands of this year’s candidates.
In Larry Sabato’s book “A more Perfect Consitution” he raises up 23 possible amendments to the constitution in order to create a more perfect United States of America. Whilst many of Sabato’s suggestions are great and deserve reflection and study, his 12th suggestion; “Allow men and women not born in the U.S. to run for President or Vice President after having been a citizen for 20 years”, is by far the more pressing and important issue. Throughout the course of this paper I will uncover the original intent of the Natural-born Citizen Clause, the opinions of opponents and proponents of the idea, and the history of laws proposed in order to create such an amendment. The idea of allowing naturalised citizens hold higher office (Presidential/Vice
The presidential campaign of 1828 was the dawn of modern politics for the United States. Towards the election of 1828, the election process had changed in numerous ways. New states such as Indiana, Alabama, and Mississippi wanted new settlers as Americans were expanding westward, so they made constitutions that eliminated landholding requirements for voting. In turn, older states revised their laws to keep citizens at home, resulting in 21 out of 24 states that had universal suffrage for white men. At this time, the notion that presidents had to be wealthy and well-educated was gone, and the new ideal as the head of America was “the common man”.
It Only Takes One Second What bigger dream could a child possess than to pursue a career as president? Parents all across the nation instill the possibility of leading the country into the minds of little boys and girls each and every day. The concept of supreme power, a mansion, and nationwide recognition fabricates a false depiction of life as the president. Representing an entire country is an immense amount of power that can cause “heavy strain” on an individual (Coolidge 240).
In founding father Alexander Hamilton’s words in favor of and regarding the implementation of the Electoral College in the Federalist No 68, he says, “… the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.”
Citizens have a say but at the same time uneducated people are not able to solely choose the next president of the United States. As Alexander Hamilton, an american statesmen and one of the founding fathers, said, “It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station” (document 1). Alexander Hamilton is saying smart, educated men should be the ones deciding who should become the next president. The United States has had the same system that has worked flawlessly, there is no reason to change a system that is still working
Williams suggests that the founders thought that the Electoral College was a sensible plan, but things don’t always work out how they should (28). It is a relic of America’s predemocratic past when leaders were scared of having too much power over the people (Klinker, McClellan 1). Congressional Digest suggests that we are stuck in a time warp (31). We still rely on a horse-and-buggy election system in the age of the internet (Congressional Digest 31). Congressional Digest points out the fact that voters today know more about the candidates than they did 200 years ago (19).
To What Extent Should the United States Restructure its Electoral College System? : States With the 2016 election in the books, the United States has elected a candidate that lost the popular vote by over two million votes. This is the second time in the twenty first century that this has occurred. In such a democratic nation, the ability to win the important office of the presidency without popular consent raises a few concerns about the two hundred and forty year old system. In a democracy, the voices of the states and their respective populations must be heard.
Washington takes his position as President of the United States and uses it to his advantage to spread his words and thoughts to all of the American public. He uses his Farewell Address to build his ethos and establish his credibility. Throughout his speech, Washington uses personal pronouns to connect him with the American public. When speaking of his hopes for his retirement, Washington conveys his desire to partake in America’s upbringing “in the midst of my fellow-citizens” and enjoy “our mutual cares, labors, and dangers” (16). Washington’s use of personal pronouns connects him to the American public because it establishes his role as an American citizen along with the rest of the country.
In The Rise of the Plebiscitary Presidency, Professor Craig Rimmerman argues against the “plebiscitary presidency”, where the president governs through the direct support of the American people. Rimmerman argues that the Framers of the Constitution assumed that the legislative branch would serve as the central policymaking role. The modern plebiscitary presidency has been shaped by the tremendous amount of personal power drawn from the people through the Supreme Court and Congress. Rimmerman argues that the consequence of a presidentially-centered form of government that Neustadt and other scholars failed to recognize is that presidents will strive to meet the expectations that come with the new presidency to the extreme, where they will exert
As one of the most hotly debated areas of the US government, the Electoral College deserves to be given a more in-depth look. It was originally founded as a way to prevent a lack of informed voters from electing an unqualified president. Now, it still serves its original purpose, but has become far less necessary in an age of easily accessible information. Despite having some positive points, the Electoral College is too overburdened by issues like unfair vote distribution and a high failure rate to be an effective system. The way the Electoral College distributes votes is overtly favorable to less populated states.
Last of all, debates in the past have also helped us determine the next president because of how the candidate acts during the debates and how they respond to the questions. ’’During the second debate between President Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter … Ford botched a line about Soviet influence in Eastern Europe. “There is no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe,” said Ford … Ford’s answer was at complete odds with the reality of the Cold War.
As citizens we tend to elect our leaders, especially the president, based on promises, reputation, and life decisions. When voting for the next president of the Unites States we are simply voting for the person whose character we like best. Their promises and platforms reveal what they believe in and their statements and arguments reveal what they truly stand for. For the citizens of the Unites States character is a extremely important factor in determining who they vote for because character reveals the personality and beliefs of the president. However we must acknowledge that Presidents are also human and they make personal decision due to what they see best for them and not the rest of the country.
“The true democracy, living growing and inspiring, puts its faith in the people - faith that the people will not simply elect men who will represent their views ably and faithfully, but will also elect men who will exercise their conscientious judgement - faith that the people will not condemn those whose devotion to principle leads them to unpopular courses, but will reward courage, respect honor, and ultimately recognize right”(Kennedy). As It is