For many years, America’s voting system has been criticized, with the main point of interest being the Electoral College. Some say that the Electoral College is necessary to streamline and simplify the voting process, while others say that it is outdated and takes away power from American citizens. After investigating the subject, it is clear that the Electoral College should be abolished due to the three major defects its critics find in the system; its undemocratic nature, its tendency to give small states’ votes too much power, and its disastrous effects on third-party candidates. The first, and possibly largest, defect in the Electoral College is its undemocratic nature. A professor of political science once said that “the Electoral College violates political equality” (Edwards 453).
Duterte presents himself as the crusader that goes against media and other political heads calling them out as corrupt people or the elites that are the enemy of the masses and that he is the righteous one to the people. Yet the issue of populism is not how this method is used, but how it’s used for. Political ideals that are righteously wrong that are used to make the population believe or perceive as their right, twisting the true intention of these politicians to make the populous believe that they are on their side. Professor in School of Public and International Affairs Cas Mudde would answer on populism being a political issue, “Yes, populism is an important feature of contemporary politics, but not all anti-establishment politics is populism and populist parties are not just about populism.
When they both decide to go against the government, it is solely because both think that government prevents the Transcendentalist lifestyle. This lifestyle, means that one is exempt from taxes or any other enforced laws and regulations, as a Transcendentalist disagrees with the very core of the state. So, under the guise of moral responsibility, civil disobedience is a way to act for their own personal gain. McCandless has a distaste for government, having strong views on various politicians, many of which he dislikes. His political leanings are reminiscent of Thoreau’s essay ‘On Duty of Civil Disobedience’, and can be summed up with, “ ‘I heartily accept the motto - ‘That
Is Gerrymandering a Controversial Topic? Gerrymandering is a process where the ruling political party uses the map of their state to draw lines that create voting districts in favor of their party. The result of this is that it doesn’t reflect the voters political views. For about 200 years the government has used gerrymandering during political elections and it continues to be used today (King, Elizabeth) . But recently gerrymandering has become more controversial because people feel that it has taken away their rights as a voter and it swings the votes to one side by a big percentage.
McCloy tried to argue that political donation is part of political participation which is protected by implied freedom of political communication. His argument has been rejected by all judges based on the model of representative government. because of the high risk of corruption the joint judgement argued that discrimination between property developers and general public in terms of political donation is legitimate. Despite the ICAC report on cases of corruption of property developers and the fact that the property developers directly benefit from the decisions made by government, Nettle raise the discrimination factor to argue that the restriction on property developers should be
Republicans and Democrats alike hastened into polling places to cast their vote. Legal American citizens placed their ballots to make their voice heard above all the white noise of politics. Today, America is deeply rooted into the Two-Party system. This system establishes organization that keeps chaos from claiming this free land. Without this structure that naturally assumed position from the very first election, all citizens would be thrown into disarray, immediately confused by the change.
Elections and politics currently believed by many to be focused on spoiler effects, polling, and electability. Some sour victims of these elections have come up with what they believe is a “solution” to politics. This “solution” is known as RCV. Ranked choice voting, or RCV, is a system in which people can choose their first, second, and third choice candidates, and votes will be given accordingly. Regardless of what representatives of RCV may tell you, RCV is unconstitutional, costly, and very time-consuming, which is why allowing voters to rank their choices for elections should not be allowed.
Also, the winner-take-all attitude discourages independent or third party candidates from running for office (Hershey). Disadvantages: Because people have only two options, voters will have problems choosing the right politician. Two-party systems also promote deadlock and polarization. Every party is looking for political dominance,
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.
The way the electoral college is not fair to the people if it come to a tie or nobody reaches the 270 votes needed because their vote does not matter anymore and it goes to the house of representatives and they will side with whatever party they are with, Winner takes all method makes it so third party does not have any chance to win at all even if a 50/49 vote all electoral votes will go to the 50%, Lastly it needs to be abolished because it is not fair to smaller states and prefers larger states with having a lot more electoral votes than other states. The electoral college is something that was working in the past because the states were not associated with any party and with the changes to America and her people the way we elect our leader needs to change