The electoral campaign of 2016 is often considered to be unprecedented in terms of the societal fractures that emerged over the course of the presidential race. However, upon further review it becomes clear that the election of 1968 had striking similarities to the most recent campaign, such as heightened racial and generational tensions, the lack of unity and enthusiasm that voters had for their party’s nominee, the above average impact of third-party candidates, and the increased polarization of politics.
Racial Tensions: Following a spike in police shootings against unarmed black men, and the ensuing riots, President Obama stated that “All of us, as Americans, should be troubled by these shootings, because these are not isolated incidents.
…show more content…
1968 saw roughly a 3% drop in total voter turnout compared to the 1960 election, with over 10 million new registered voters but only an increase of 4 million in votes cast. This indicates that many students and first-time eligible voters simply felt too disillusioned with their options to vote, largely hurting Humphrey’s campaign . The drop is even more dramatic for 2016, with a 4% drop compared to 2008. While Donald Trump garnered a similar total of votes compared to his Republican counterpart from 2008, Hillary Clinton had almost 10 million less than Barack Obama, thanks largely due to decreased voter turnout from youth voters and minorities. In both cases, Humphrey and Clinton blamed their defeat on the Democratic party’s division, and its inability to unify to overcome their Republican …show more content…
Caught in this bifurcate situation, many voters chose to back independent candidates Gary Johnson or Jill Stein. However, unfortunately for Clinton, many of those Americans who voted for third parties had originally supported Bernie Sanders, but chose to abandon the Democratic party rather than voting for Clinton. While neither candidate won nearly as many votes as Wallace, even when combined, if in a number of key states the third party votes went to Clinton, then she would have won the
Retrieved from http://content.time.com/time/specials/2007/la_riot/article/0,28804,1614117_1614084_1614831,00.html. Levy, W. (2013). The 'Standard'. United States presidential election of 2000.
It’s hard to imagine a period in American political history that hasn’t been dominated by a duopoly of political parties. Even though resistance from the founding fathers on the issue of political parties is well documented, the two-party system we are well accustomed to developed shortly after the emergence of the United States as an independent nation. Whether it was the Federalist/Democratic-Republican system in the late 18th and early 19th centuries or the Democratic/Republican system we know today, two ideologically opposite parties have always maintained dominant control of the American political system. The existence of third parties and independent candidates, therefore, complicates the political system that we have used for centuries. Steven Rosenstone contends that the existence of our current two-party system is due, in part, to the ability of the two major parties to provide benefits in exchange for voter support. What then occurs when either of the major parties fails in its responsibility to be accountable to the public? While several options exist, including the demand for change within major parties, third parties and independent candidates become a viable option to restore a sense of accountability among American politicians. Even though third parties and independent candidates might seem attractive to voters, they often are unable to find success in any major elections. This lack of success can be attributed to many different factors, including constitutional and electoral barriers, as well as deficiencies born from the general lack of knowledge about third parties. Why then do third parties and independent candidates continue to exist in American politics? The ability of a third party to influence the policy p...
Some registration laws in the past had clearly been designed to abstain certain races and types of people from registering, these restricted rather than assisted voter turnout. In the South they made provisions to stop African-Americans voting and the North implemented obstacles such as the poll tax and literacy tests. These were blatant attempts to stop people who were not of the typical voter, an educated white male landowner from casting a ballot. Typically in the South turnout historically tends to be lower than that of the North. An example of this is the contest between Kennedy and Nixon when only 40% of the south turned out to vote compared with 70% of the rest of the nation. These southern states tend to be the ones who were part of the old Confederacy. They still seem to have similar political ideologies, as in the most recent election George W. Bush took all these states in defeating Al Gore. It seems that the stigma connected to the civil war that ended over 130 years ago still seems to loom over American politics. However due to the 1965 Voting Rights Act, procedures for registration have become much more user friendly in allowing a much wider scope of American citizens to register. Because of this Act I am going to concentrate on the more recent elections and explanations for the low turnout.
In our society today, it is very sad that the African-American community has lost a great trust and respect for the Mayor, the police commissioner and the N.Y.P.D. Amadou Diallo's shooting was very upsetting for the African-American community. The shooting shock many people because an unarmed innocent black male was shot 41 times in front of his home by four officers that assume him to be a rapist.
It’s very unsettling to know that there was a six percent decrease in young voters (ages 18-29) in the 2012 election compared to 2008 (Circle Youth data). In 2007 the National Conference of State Legislatures publicly released a report and data set on voter turnout in democratic countries. This is a quote from that report titled Getting out the Vote, “It should be noted that in 1972, 18-year-olds were added to the eligible voting population, thus decreasing the percentages. Nonetheless, voter tu...
“The Candidate” is a prime example to the inside of a campaign and the inside of an election. Elections do not only include the candidate themselves but the campaign manager, the supporters, the nominee’s family and the media crew. During “The Candidate” democratic nominee John McKay uses many strategies in order to “not” win his election for senator of California. Going into this campaign McKay was in hopes that he would not win the election, as time passed his view of the election changed as did his strategies.
Research has brought about an abundance of reasons why youth are becoming less engaged in the political process. Education, absence of political knowledge, the media and family influence, indifference to election campaigns, inadequate amount of change, and lack of motivation are all possible factors in influencing the youth voter turnout.
The 1872 election was the United States’ 22nd presidential election. President Ulysses S. Grant was elected to a second term in office, a re-election that was attained in the face of a split within the Republican Party. This split created a third party called the “Liberal Republicans”. This third party nominated Horace Greeley of New York to oppose Grant, which caused the Democratic Party to support Greeley without nominating a candidate of its own. Grant won the re-election by a landslide, but that didn’t stop the Republican Party from splitting so far down the middle that the effects can still be seen today.
Today, political parties can be seen throughout everyday life, prevalent in various activities such as watching television, or seeing signs beside the road while driving. These everyday occurrences make the knowledge of political parties commonly known, especially as the two opposing political parties: the Republicans and the Democrats. Republican and Democrats have existed for numerous years, predominantly due to pure tradition, and the comfort of the ideas each party presents. For years, the existence of two political parties has dominated the elections of the president, and lower offices such as mayor, or the House of Representatives. Fundamentally, this tradition continues from the very emergence of political parties during the election of 1796, principally between Federalist John Adams and Anti-federalist Thomas Jefferson. Prior to this election people unanimously conformed to the ideas of one man, George Washington, and therefore did not require the need for political parties.1 However, following his presidency the public was divided with opposing opinions, each arguing the best methods to regulate the country. Ultimately, the emergence of different opinions regarding the future of the United States involving the economy, foreign relations, ‘the masses,’ and the interpretation of the Constitution, led to the two political parties of the 1790s and the critical election of 1800.
Firstly, it is known that party affiliation is greatly influential in voter’s decisions. Because it is usually reinforced by society, party identification tends to be very strong, and typically unchangeable throughout an individual’s life. However, even though it might influence an individual’s decision on Presidential elections, it is more effective in shaping the decisions of voters on less-visible races. That is, it is more effective if the voters are not familiar with the candidates, than if they know them. After the 1960s, nevertheless, parties have become weaker on its influence to the public. This phenomenon, mostly associated to the influence of mass media, which portrays candidates by personality and not party, has made people less likely to develop a strong party affiliation. The evidence is shown on the number of people describing themselves as independents, and the rise of split-ticket voting. On the other hand, party identification among a large number of the most active voters has grown
In a speech given in support of Trayvon Martin, President Barack Obama spoke about his own personal experiences with Racial Profiling and how the story behind Trayvon’s death hits home because it easily could’ve been him. This is the full video of Obama speaking about Trayvon Martin and race in America . The mentality of “this could’ve been me” that Pr...
Americans have become so engrossed with the rhetoric of political parties that many are unable have real discussions about “freedom, fairness, equality, opportunity, security, accountability.” (Lakoff p.177) The election of 1828 gave birth to the “professional politician” it demonstrated how “ambivalence” on issues, how image and the right language or narrative can influence voters. Partisanship did increase competition and empower voters to a greater degree, but it has also divided Americans and obstructed communication. As one historian declared the “old hickory” killed the ideal of nonpartisan leadership. (Parsons p.184) For better or for worse American politics were forever be changed in 1828.
Smith’s poem, “Unrest in Baton Rouge,” she states “Our bodies run with ink dark blood” (1), a reference to the days of slavery when traders believed that the darker the blood of an African man, the stronger, more dependable, and more valuable he would be. The next line demonstrates an even darker theme: “Blood pools in the pavement seams” (Smith, 2). The line laments that, as perpetuated by the mainstream media, African Americans are being gunned down in the streets of this country indiscriminately by law enforcement officers. In terms of absolute numbers, more white Americans are killed by police that AfricanAmericans (560 versus 318, respectively, in 2015 and 2016). Admittedly, based on relative population, AfricanAmericans are more likely to be killed by police officers than whites; however, in 2015 and 2016 there were a total of just 1388 and 1034 police involved shootings, representing just 0.0003 0.0004% of the U.S. population (Palma). While any death is lamentable, it is clear from these numbers that the police are not out looking to kill black men. While she
The reversal value system of the two parties is also explained by what they stand for. It is indicated that the parties have shifted, but the voters are probably still stuck in them. Racial issues have caused a major flip of the parties evidenced by the movement of the southern whites from the Democratic to the Republican Party. Economic policy and income distribution have also caused a significant shift since 1896 (Dalton, 2013). The Republican Party has been seen to observe big business while the Democratic Party is taking the side of labor.
Protests around the world have taken place to fight for justice in the black community. The immense number of deaths of unarmed black men and women is a clear sign that they are more likely to be killed by police than white people. Physical violence and excessive use of force by the U.S. police towards African Americans are seen in the news regularly. “People, including police officers, hold strong implicit associations between blacks, and probably Hispanics, and weapons, crime and aggression," said Jack Glaser. Police brutality statistics show that African Americans are three times more likely to be murdered by cops than any other race. Racial disparity in the United States is a coherent reason for the increase of criminal injustice in the United