In the past, the most efficient way to give citizens around the country an opportunity to vote was the electoral college, or so the founding fathers thought. Nonetheless, the electoral college should be abolished because citizens’ votes should all count equally all states should get the same attention from presidential candidates, and everyone’s voice should be heard. The electoral college system ultimately fails the citizens of bigger states because their votes don’t count as much as those in smaller states. How? Well, as previously mentioned, there’s 538 electors who are distributes
For instant, if I was a Republican this would be a great opportunity to lead in an election. Since most of the people voting Democrat, will possibly be turned away because they were unable to provide the required documentation by law. However, if I was Democrat, this could be considered a hindrance for my supports to vote. I really don’t see the equality of how an individual can be allowed to vote by absentee vote if they are not on active military duty. For instance, college students, who are permitted to vote absentee.
Furthermore, he can’t tell what is in the best interest of the nation. The amount of criticism coming from Trump about the leaders in America and his republican opponents is tremendous. By mentioning his opponents acts and believes he puts himself in a better positon in hopes to get himself elected as the final republican candidate. Donald Trump establishes his ethos by mentioning his earlier experiences and background. According to himself he’s worth as a presidential candidate because of his experience in the business, and that he’s not the typical “nice person” that people have seen in the past elections.
"’I voted last election, same as everyone, and I laid it on the line for President Noble. I think he 's one of the nicest-looking men who ever became president.’ ‘Oh, but the man they ran against him!’” (93). STEWE 2: We also see that the government puts a less attractive candidate
He believed the people should have the power to elect their president. Jackson also surrounded himself with people who supported him. He had replaced the “corrupt bargain” with the “spoils system” in doing this. During his during term he did not do much, but in the reelection his beliefs about the Second Bank of the United States was the main point that determined who would be the next president. Jackson won with flying colors and he was onto his second term.
For example, Senator James Hillhouse’s proposal in 1808 that would allow retiring senators to choose a president by drawing colored balls from a box (Hardaway). Despite all the attempts, the Electoral College has stood the test of time. Why? Because without it, candidates would no longer be required to seek support throughout the country. They could focus solely on highly populated areas and completely ignore the needs of less populated states and regions.
But the most interesting thing that i was able to conclude from my day at the polls, was the overwhelming majority that had equally bad things to say about Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. This majority opinion was highlighted in one quote from one of the voters “They both are flawed candidates, and honestly they cancel out each other so i 'm really just voting on the issues”. These results point to the majority of people voted on the issues, and partisan views rather than the candidates themselves. Martin P. Wattenberg backs up this claim in his article “The Declining Relevance of Candidate Personal Attributes in Presidential Elections””The analysis in this article demonstrates that the personal attributes of the presidential candidates have become less and less relevant to the outcome of presidential elections in recent years. Substantially fewer voters are mentioning the personal characteristics of the candidates when asked what they like and dislike about them.
Third party candidates lack political influence in the U.S. due to the overwhelming two major party success rates. Their success can be largely attributed to the many electoral institutional rules that contribute to limiting the rise of third parties, their competition. This historically proven major party dominance is due to many factors including institutional arrangements, election laws, electoral college rules, and campaign finance laws that have shaped the course of American elections; however, there are instances in which third parties can overcome electoral institutional challenges and make noticeable progress. The institutional arrangements in the United States have made major two-party success almost inevitable; however, there is
Today, Andrew Jackson is known far and wide in the United States as having been a large advocate of democracy. He proclaimed himself a Democrat, and while running for president, he campaigned that he would change the system to help directly represent the people instead of through representatives. Being a Democrat running against a Republican, most people would think that Andrew Jackson would be the most anti-republican person ever. However, that was not entirely the case. Jackson was neither anti-republican nor the most Republican person one can imagine.
Politics and Debating There are 7,463,973,000 people,237 countries, and 237 national leaders in the world. Since not all countries elect their leaders in a democratic way, there are much fewer presidents in the world. These chosen, special leaders of the nations must have great abilities that can lead to the nation’s wealth and world peace, and presidential candidates often show these abilities to the voters through presidential debates. However, some people argue that having great debating ability doesn’t prove the person’s aptitude as a president. This is not true, and the ability to debate well is highly needed.
Although the popular votes do not determine the elector votes, it almost always happens where the electors vote for whom the popular votes resulted in. This is one of the many reasons why the Electoral College is unfair, past elections have shown that bigger populations have more electoral votes, concluding that smaller states’ votes become insignificant. This leaves people in question, is the Electoral College now based on where you live? Even though the purpose of the electoral college is to ultimately decide who will occupy the position of the president, there was an Electoral Commision of elite representatives, established to determine the 19th President, because of the situation the electoral college caused. The commission included five representatives from the House, another five associates from the Senate and five justices from the Supreme Court.
The “Scholastic Election” in 1940, states that the children have predicted every presidential election correctly with only two exceptions. This result cannot be created without parents, who have the privileges to vote, espouses to their children. Thought there are two exceptions: Turman’s win over Dewely in 1948 and Kennedy’s win over Nixon in 1960, both election have reasons to their mispredicting. The election between Turman and Dewely was mispredicted because Dewely supporters losing motivation to vote by the widespread victory projection. Kennedy and Nixon’s election was mispredicted because Nixon lost the electoral poll despite winning the popular poll.
The people of each state vote for the electors who then cast their votes on the people’s behalf. “As the 2000 election reminded us, the Electoral College does make it possible for a candidate to win the popular vote and still not become president” (Miller, J., 2008, February 11), yet that is less a result of the Electoral College and more a result of the way states allocate balloters. In every state except Maine and Nebraska, voters are honored on a champ take-all premise. So if a competitor wins a state by even a restricted edge, he or she wins the majority of the state 's discretionary votes. The winner take-all framework is not governmentally commanded; states are allowed to dispense their constituent votes as they wish (Miller, J., 2008, February 11).
This easily corruptible system of electing officials continued until 1910 when Progressives won enough seats to take a majority lead in the legislature after surging forward the last several years. Not only did the Progressives win the legislature, they also won the Gubernatorial election with Hiram Johnson’s victory. In order to fight the corruption of convention system, the Progressives enacted the policies and procedures of the direct primary system. The “sharpest blow to parties was a procedure called cross-filing.” (Masket 2011,
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