In addition, the winner-take-all system, also known as “unit rule”, while not always necessarily representative of the popular vote, “the electoral college and unit rule provide decisive majorities that lend stability to our presidential election system” (Josephson, Ross 162). This stability compliments the argument that it simply isn’t worth the effort to make any changes to the Electoral College because of the work involved and how functional it is. The Electoral College may not be the most ideal system, but it performs the functions it was designed to do. As said by Alexander Bickel on the
One great way to deal with factions is by having a government that knows how to control and deal with their effects. Madison believes that a republic can do that job better than a democracy, because a democracy is a small society of people who can not admit there is a cure to factions. He believes that a large republic would work out well for the States, because a larger government causes less negative impacts on the people, even though all of the people won’t be known, the government won’t be too centralized and only focused on the
The United States of America is considered one of the most “free” country in the world to outsiders. However, these results is a collective endeavor from the past, with many revisions to the laws, changes to the government and the substitution of numerous politicians. Equally important, unjust laws and corrupt bureaucrats can often times lead to civil disobedience or even a revolution. That being said, Samuel Adams, Thomas Paine and Henry David Thoreau are all instrumental architects to early U.S. politics that would eventually shape the political culture of civil disobedience. In short, Samuel Adams was a key figure in the American revolution who organized important oppositions to Great Britain.
People also overlook their capability to resolve issues; many believe they are not influential enough, but in reality, working together is the most effective form of opposition to the government. Today, several conflicts in society could easily be fixed if every individual
The power of the government was most equally distributed amongst the people, states and central government, decreasing the possibility of tyranny. A stable democracy with its inalienable rights also protected the citizens from losing their rights in the event of the formation fo a tyrannical government. However, the government increased the chances for a tyranny to occur through the elastic clause and Gerrymandering. While the Constitution did include stable democraces, inalienable rights and power divisions, all of which protect against tyranny, Gerrymandering and the Elastic Clause allow for tyranny to occur. The colonists created a system in which the government had limited power but enough to maintain the country while the states and the people received equally limited power as well.
Although older generations have critiqued social media by saying that it is isolating younger people, individualism as Tocqueville perceived it is extremely limited since there is the exchange of new thoughts and people can common goals to fight for such as the recent DAPL protest which gained traction and success through social media. Since there are so few regulations for the internet, the freedom it allows one to see Tocqueville 's concepts for democracy in a purer form in not just America, but throughout the world. Tocqueville envisioned that his country would flourish under the democratic concepts he observed while in America. However, he considered the delicate balance each of the concepts had, knowing that if one restricted or left unrestrained, it would harm the nation. In this new technology reliant
This seems deceptive because the people of that state vote for their party, not the opposing side. However, as seen multiple times in history, representatives have voted against their party. Although it seems as if the state representatives have the power to manipulate the majority’s vote, it is noted that the people choose their representatives (so the voters receive what they voted for). Through the establishment of the Electoral College, people are allowed to vote for their representatives, candidates have a better understanding of the nation’s needs, and there is more equal representation. It is with these reasons that I support the Electoral College and do not think that it should be modified nor abolished.
That does not count out the small states though, they are still entitled to their opinion, so they still get representatives to do so. Just not as many as higher populated states. Unfortunately the bigger states has more of a say in congress, but that does not always leave them out, they still get their word in when needed (Document D.” How did the government Guard against
Even if the popular vote brings the majority closer to it, there is a more effective way of voting for candidates than the Electoral College, while making as many voices heard. The founding fathers built an excellent system for their times, but it has been centuries and their principles are outdated. People cry for a more fair way of electing a president, to get rid of the Electoral College. The TPAE is the most effective way of making it not to complex to vote nor is it hard to implement. The only wall that needs to be jumped are all of the states following through with this system, it could give us extra time to think of something
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. I In an ideal democracy, voters will vote for the politicians and policies that can bring the most benefit to themselves, while the rules of the society cares about how to maximize the social welfare as a whole.
It allows for some continuity and stability for the current government. “It contributes to the political stability of the nation by encouraging a two-party system and discouraging the proliferation of splinter parties such as those that have plagued many European democracies”(Thirty-Thousand.org 11). Lastly the electoral college helps encourage minority parties. Due to how the Electoral College distributes power, many minority interests have the ability to be represented and even backed by larger parties in order to get Electoral College votes. While a third party may have particular difficulty in securing a presidency, they can at least have enough delegates that their interests have to be taken
However, the legislative branch of the new government proposed in the Constitution is able to control the malignant effects of factions because the representatives are able to pass legislation that affects large portions of the nation instead of individuals. Madison then states that a pure democracy, in which ordinary citizens govern themselves, are not able to control the effects of factions, but a republic, in which citizens elect representatives to govern, is able to. The reason that republics can control the effects of political parties is because the representatives have to consider the good of the whole nation; Madison hopes that their patriotism will override their temporary interests. Furthermore, representatives, given that they are elected into office, should be men of good morals and intelligence; Madison believes these men of this caliber are more fit to govern a country than average citizens. In conclusion, Madison discusses in Federalist 10 what factions are and how they work, and why a republic is the best government to combat the negative effects of
The act of gerrymandering does threaten democracy because it aids a specific political party,it is unfair to the voters, and it allows politicians to have control over the voters. Within the gerrymandering game, the political party that was supported was commonly content and fully supported the plan while the opposition was almost always completely against the decision making it difficult to compromise. The point of a democracy is to represent everyone who has the power to vote. The two main parties in the United States are Republican and Democratic and yield the highest chance of having an official be elected for state governments, or local district governments compared to third parties. When one party gerrymanders, they weaken the other party 's chances of gaining power.
Dissolving the electoral college and instituting a voting system where every citizen’s vote count, could allow for third party members to finally have a strong chance of being a primary candidate for election. This may allow America’s voice to be heard better if everyone had a say in the election. For the most part, Americans have only two choices the primary, Democrat and the Primary Republican, but without the electoral college a lesser candidate that might not be backed with a substantial amount of monetary wealth could win. Finally, a state may be Republican or Democratic, but there are still citizens voting against the majority in the state. Those citizens don’t have say as of right now, but if the electoral college was done away with
Our founding fathers realized that, governmentally, there were already some great divides in our country, much of it economical in quality, and much of it due to simple situation. The office of the committee and the vice presidency is the only internal decision we hold all other lawmakers are voted in at or below state level, but for these two highest offices, the election is internal. and they wanted to establish that no certain type of industrial or political circumstance could control this highest election, so they conceived of the 'electoral college ', and it always has the same number of members as the total of our congressmen in