NOT Result In Presidential Elections

Some reforms that have been built around the promise of public interest are the prison institutions, businesses, political machines, and voting rights. Before their reformation, these systems were oppressing minority communities from thriving.

include racism, sexicm, and inequality. These are such some of the corruptions in the voting

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 the United States establishes itself as a superpower, the need for politics becomes less important to the citizens. Also, we are experiencing a shift in focus to developing more technology and building

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. Given

America was molded by a group of individuals who felt that their voice was being drowned out by a tyrannical monarchy. After the revolution, this was resolved by creating a system that attempted to allow all people to have a say in the country’s government. The Electoral College was established as a representative way for the citizens of America to elect a leader; however, many are not satisfied with the results. A growing number of Americans would rather have a direct popular vote than the Electoral College. This disparity comes from believing that the current system is not democratic and prevents each vote from being viewed equally. The Electoral College needs to be changed because it misrepresents the opinions of the people, dismisses

Voting could be considered the most prestigious principle for the definition of democracy. The ability to vote for an official, governor, representative, or president has been a cherished one and has kept the powerful in check by giving the power to the people. In this modern generation, voting is not considered a privilege, it is a right, but there are devious loopholes in the fallible laws that have violated the rights of the majority of citizens. These loopholes have given the power of choice back to the hands of the powerful, and they do so through covert methods, some thought out and created by the founding fathers themselves. The fault rightfully shifts to the Electoral College. Once a proud entity during the early development of Colonial

Instead of abolishing the Electoral Vote, it introduces the idea of abolishing the popular vote. Eric Boehm states in his article, “Yes, get rid of the popular vote. For all the money, time, and attention paid to the presidential race, the actual votes cast on Election Day are basically meaningless.” Boehm believes that the vote of the people has no direct influence on which candidate ultimately chosen for president. This Article eludes to the idea that popular vote is an illusion set by the government to make a person believe that they are voting for the president when in reality, their vote does not have any influence on who will win the election. Therefore, the stance of Boehm is that the government should get rid of the ‘popular vote’ process completely, instead of making any changes to the Electoral

The Electoral College was made because the first leaders did not want a government where only the majority of its people ruled. They thought that it would be unfair. They believed that a pure democracy would destroy the country. There are two parts in the voting process. The first part is democratic. This is the part where the citizens vote, but they are not voting for the future president. They are voting for a “slate of presidential electors” (Mitchell).The president is not chosen by a popular vote. The president is chosen by 538 people in the Electoral College. Part two is where the Electoral College casts their votes and a candidate must receive 270 votes in order to win the presidency. The number of Electoral Votes for every state is determined on the sum of the senators and representatives they have in Congress. Each state has at least three Electoral Votes (“AP U.S. Government.”).

The answer to this problem is a not a more direct voting system based on the popular vote. Conversely, even though all forms of democracy have problems, the current elections process produces exceptionally bad

In fact, in ‘Why the Electoral College Should be Abolished’, the author argues how the Electoral College doesn’t isolate “...the effects of illegal voting (or unfair vote counting) to the state in which it occurs”, but instead, “...the “winner take all” arrangement of the Electoral College actually magnifies the effect of the voting fraud tremendously” (8). Fraudulent voters would completely overtake all the legitimate voters in the whole state if they tipped an election (“Why the Electoral” 8). Therefore, the “winner take all” arrangement isn’t the most reliable, due to how it could be influenced by dishonest voters who could tip the scales in their favor, and would completely undermine the legitimacy of the election. Voters in certain political parties might go as far as to manipulate the Electoral College in order to have their candidate win the

The question whether democracy produces or reduces corruption has been raised in the past decade observing the mixed evidences occurred across the world. Some democratic states tend to successfully overcome the problem of corruption, some in contrary faces with the more dramatic trouble than before. In the some unsuccessful, discourses were made blaming democracy as a tool for greedy agencies to take advantage from the people of the country. In Thailand for example, the discourse that the election system is no more reliable because of populist activities performing by the corrupted government agencies in order to “buy vote” from the poor and uneducated majority is apparent. People seem to lost faith in democracy due to the belief that it is an instrument of immorality. However, the belief is untruthful. Democracy takes the significant part in reducing corruption with only that the process is not happen naturally. In this essay, the argument f how democracy could reduce corruption is to be explain statistically, graphically, and verbally.

There are lots of advantages as well as disadvantages entailed with how the first past the post works. A major advantage of the first past the post system is how simple and straightforward it is for the constituents, as well as people around the world to understand it. For example, in the general election in the UK, Natalie McGarry was elected the MP for the Glasgow East constituency because she gained more votes than the other candidate did, by 56.9% of the votes, which is very simple to understand. However, although the first past the post is one of the few system that are easy to understand, it can in fact lead to distorted results that can make people confused. For instance, at the end of world word 2, the winning party who won the election actually received fewer voter than the party coming in second place. This does not seem fair or matter of fact democratic, because the

In the United States, people always talk about freedom and equality. Especially they want elections could be more democratic. In American Democracy in Peril, Hudson’s main argument regarding chapter five “Election Without the People’s Voice,” is if elections want to be democratic, they must meet three essential criteria, which are to provide equal representation of all citizens, to be mechanisms for deliberation about public policy issues, and to control what government does. Unfortunately, those points that Hudson mentions are what American elections do not have.

Many people believe that the election plays the most important role in democracy. Because a free and fair election holds the government responsible and forces it to behave on voter's interest. However, some scholars find evidence that election itself is not enough to hold politicians responsible if the institutions are not shaping incentives in a correct way. In other words, the role of the election on democracy, whether it helps to serve the interest of the public or specific groups, depends on other political institutions.

Over the course of this paper I will be discussing the main topic of the election that not only affects the United States of America, but the world in general. It is an election that can either change the course of history for the better or for the worse. This election occurs in between each term of the elected individual each of the two terms they could possibly serve. What election am referring to you may ask? The election that I am talking about is of course the presidential election. The presidential election is an event in which citizens’ of the United States are given the grand opportunity to voice their opinions and let their feelings be heard loudly and clear. The citizens of the United States are given the opportunity to vote for a