Next, STV provides a sophisticated link between a constituency and its representative. The constituencies should have more sensible reflective towards the community’s feeling instead of being more incentive to campaign and
However, its main flaw is not confer on the designated meeting a true representation of the electorate. Cutting by riding makes possible "gerrymandering" to eliminate candidates "undesirable" who must be many more votes than in the neighboring riding to get elected. The proportional voting system is fairer and more democratic but it is criticized for generating government instability. The parties that are able to govern often implement alliances or coalitions with other political parties to obtain a majority in the House of Representatives.
Party government, also known as responsible parties, is an idea supported by people who believe that strong government could be efficient to deal with economic and social problems at national levels. This “party government” is significantly different from the traditional American limited government, including a clear statement about principles, accountable candidates, differentiated campaigns, and responsible officeholders for party programs. For the United States to create responsible party government, there are three major prerequisites. Strong presidents such as Reagan and Bush can make the public recognize the gap between parties and have control over the Congress on bills and policies. However, such powerful presidents would bring a “presidential government” instead of responsible parties.
In Document C, Samples provides a federalist argument for supporting the electoral college by stating that it gives states an important role in choosing the president and thus supporting a fundamental principle of our democracy. The problem with Sample’s argument is that the electoral college is in essence undemocratic. We know that the electoral college is undemocratic because not only are small states over represented but a citizens vote can be weighted more or less depending on the state in which they reside in. In Document F, we are told what happens in case of a tie or no one winning the electoral vote. In case of this situation occurring then the House of Representatives will decide on who becomes president where state representatives will all get an equal vote.
(Black, 2012) So, while it is clear that the Electoral College was set up to ensure all states have a voice, it now seems to have the ability to take away the voice of the people. It is necessary to look at our voting process and make the necessary changes needed to ensure the process of electing our President represents the voice of the people. By switching to a majority vote we ensure that the voice of all people are not only heard, but are represented equally, which is how it should be under the one-person, one-vote
The essence of decision making – and, in turn, the essence of politics – is compromise: compromise in both positive and negative aspects of a possible solution. And in every decision- making process, the most efficient way may not be the one that is most followed. People may follow suit to others, depending on their beliefs, on their personal inclinations, and their opinions on the matter. And yes, these idiosyncrasies in every individual eventually show themselves as they decide on the matter as a whole. Less-informed people, on that matter, are more likely to choose a less efficient solution, yet there are exceptions for both parties: more informed people are also likely to give out more convoluted solutions to simple problems.
It allows the people to have a clear choice between two major parties competing in the elections. William believes that there are more disadvantages of FPTP than its advantages. Ethically and theoretically, a candidate must gain the majority of preference from the people. He is the representative of the common people. So, it is essential for him to be preferred the majority of the voters.
If one chooses to be a democrat and has strict liberal views most likely their friends share the same opinions and vice versa. Politics is tricky in the sense that although an individual is headstrong about supporting the way the government runs certain criteria, the social component of politics and the social beliefs of each party can influence a person to change their mind
Functions of is political correctness the right source to look into gives a neutral tone, explain descriptive reference and show actions that can be misunderstood allowing certain groups of people to evoke their feeling or even subordinated. Political Correctness is ruining America, it 's an overwhelming majority of politician that makes american feels that this correctness has an important discourse that the society needs to have. Commonly Americans referred to political correctness as an mind challenger, acts of cultural inclusion that explain the intellectual experience, however those who dislike the political correctness often disguise the extent to the which citizens attitude are tied. This resource will help me look at the outcome of different stereotypes and be mindful of how the source that given worded by checking dates, comments and the author of the article. His purpose of this article is to persuade citizens mindset on the events that 's going on over and over for example ‘presidential election’ and change how people view the world dealing with
Policy Failure and Policy Change When does the failure of a policy lead decision makers to alter or replace it? How does policy failure influence the form and content of subsequent policy? Three streams of research address these questions. What might be termed the “accountability” approach starts from the premise that decision makers have as their primary goal maintaining their political influence, for example, by retaining office. Policy failure exposes decision makers to public criticism and demands more effective action; failing to act on such demands may weaken decision makers’ influence.
VOTING (Dictionary)Voting is a formal expression of opinion or choice, either positive or negative, made by an individual or a body of individuals. All American have the right to vote when they turn the age of 18 and are considered an adult. You only hear about voting really when it comes to the election for the President of the United States or a candidate is running for a seat in a government position. The American people believe that they should vote because they think it actually matters. Then there are those American who believe that voting is a complete waste of time.
Gerrymandering is drawing political boundaries so that your political party has a numerical advantage over the other party.1 An illustrative example of how to win a district through gerrymandering from a Washington Post article is on the right. Gerrymandering could concentrate opposing votes into a few districts to gain more seats for a majority in certain districts. Gerrymandering can also be used to help or hinder a certain demographic, like a political, racial, linguistic, religious or class group. For example, two terms used in gerrymandering are “packing” and “cracking”.
Bayard says that he can question Mr. Jefferson’s genuine actions. He believes that if Jefferson were to be voted in that the sustainability of the country would come into question, “There would be really cause to fear that the government would not survive the course of moral and political experiments to which it would be subjected to in the hands of Mr. Jefferson.” (80) So he questions whether Jefferson would be harmful or helpful to society. He comes to the conclusion that this gives reason to favor Burr, however still believes that he could possibly prefer Jefferson.
Frank Luntz, a political consultant, and Thomas Jefferson had two completely different views on the emotions and intellect of the citizens of our country. Frank Luntz believes that emotion is far more important than intellect. In an interview with Frontline, Luntz stated that the voters are more likely to respond to passion more than intellect and that one can change how the voters think, but one cannot change how they feel. Feelings are felt deeply and strongly on the inside while how someone thinks is on the outside. If candidates focus on how voters feel and try to understand how they feel, they have a much stronger chance of gaining more votes.