In 2004, the election has been the “biggest” news of the year. In 2000, the presidential election was marred by turmoil and scandal over the Florida punch card votes and alleged racial discrimination acts against minorities at the polls. The article, “Poll: U.S. Voters Skeptical of Elections” revisits the horror of the 2000 election and examines the current position of voters, Republicans, and Democrats on the accuracy of our (the U.S.) voting methods. The article states that six out of every ten Republicans and persons surveyed believed that no clear winner will be determined by November 3, 2004 and seven out of every ten Democrats feel the same. In addition, one-half of the voters feared the results would be challenged in the Supreme Court. Both political parties, Democrats and Republicans, have filed lawsuits over a variety of complaints--ranging from how provisional ballots are counted to alleged fraud in voter registration. The article states that a majority say that they are confident the vote count in their own state will be accurate, but when Democrats, as a group are asked less than one-half of them say that they are “very confident” their state’s vote count will be accurate, while three-fourths of Republicans feel that their state’s vote count will be accurate. The article says that during the closing days of the campaign, close tabs are being kept on Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Iowa, and New Mexico, which are all potential battleground states where a challenge to a close race might be lodged November 3, 2004. When reviewing the 2000 election and the Florida catastrophe more than one-half, 54 percent to be exact, thought that the vote count was unfair and inaccurate. The Democrats overwhelmingly say that the vote count was unfair and inaccurate while Republicans overwhelmingly say that the vote count was fair and accurate. Independents say by a 2-to-1 margin that it was not fair. The conclusion drawn by the article is that political and legal challenges far outweigh any other worries intended to disrupt the elections. For millions of Americans every vote no longer counts.
In political debates and elections the application of schemas, mental structures people use to organize their knowledge about the social world around themes or subjects and that influence the information people notice, think about, and remember, are very important in getting support, votes, and earning the trust of millions of Americans in Democracy and our processes.
In the wake of the 2016 general election, Michael Lind published a piece on The Smart Set entitled: Can Electoral Reform Save America? This piece centered around a single question on the ballot of a single state, question 5 in Maine, and the impact on electoral reform it could have for the country according to Lind. Using deconstruction, Lind analyzes the idea of a Ranked Choice polling system, rather than the first-past-the-post system that is currently in place in the United States. His allusions to the past as well as separate government entities globally, as well as a deconstruction of both polling systems and the impact they have (or could have) allows the reader to absorb information and produce their own personal opinion.
The voter ID issue starts with certain laws that, in the US, require that a person show a form of official ID before they are allowed to register to vote. This issue has split both Republicans and Democrats. According to Kenneth Jost, “republicans say [voter-ID laws] are needed to prevent fraud and protect the integrity of elections. Democrats say the laws are not needed and are being pushed in order to reduce voting among groups that skew Democratic in elections especially Latinos and African Americans” (Jost, p. 171). Both of these perspectives are valid, and with an open mind, can both sides have important points about the validity and inclusion of elections. On one hand, it is crucial to prevent fraud and keep the elections free of error, otherwise the outcome could be an unfair ruling. On the other side of the argument, voter-ID laws can cause discrimination and prevent people from voting, also
Society cannot let factions become disenfranchised and lose their self determination. The United States, a country founded upon the ideals of freedom and individual prosperity, cannot hold unjust elections brought upon by the current dominant political party. President Johnson created a bipartisan effort to pass the Voting Rights Act of 1965, enriching democracy and continuing the American spirit of democratic values. Johnson united Congress with the simple message, “Our mission is at once the oldest and the most basic of this country: to right wrong, to do justice, to serve man.” (Johnson) Today, the citizens of the United States must push Congress formulate an oversight measure to fix voter
It was a sunny day in Florida, and as the votes were counted from the controversial “Butterfly Ballot”, George W. Bush was ahead of Al Gore by a tiny margin of votes. It was then seen that a staggering 1,500 votes went un-counted. As the people of America demanded a recount, the Bush Administration did not want a recount, because they knew they would lose the election. So they took the matter to the courts, and won. Until this day, no full recount has ever been done. It is also very suspicious that the winning candidates brother was governor of Florida.
The Presidential Election of 1992 In 1992, the incumbent president, George Bush, was seeking reelection. It was the general consensus that he would be the 'hands down, no contest winner'. When the smoke had cleared and the votes were tallied, many were shocked at the results. Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton defeated the incumbent in a landslide!
1. O’Conner Karen and Larry Sabato. American Government: Continuity and Change, alternate 2004 ed. Longman Publishing, 2004.
Shenkman, R. (2008). Just How Stupid Are We?: Facing the Truth About the American Voter. New York: Basic Books.
The United States has strived to be a true democracy, a place in which the citizens are free to govern themselves, since its inception. For a democracy to work, the citizens must remain knowledgeable and elections must remain unbiased. Our current system of electing presidents fails in both of these regards: citizens are only given two choices that stand any chance of winning and their decisions between those two candidates are influenced not by knowledge, but instead by what they have seen on thirty second television commercials. In order to break up the complete political monopoly the Democrat and Republican Parties have on the United States, we as Americans need to reform our presidential elections so that third party and independent candidates have a legitimate chance of holding offices and so that citizens are able to vote on the candidates based on their political beliefs rather than on their ability to fundraise and advertise. Similar reforms should be made to the elections for other offices as well at the federal, state and local levels. The ideas and arguments presented in this paper can be applied to American elections in general although, because of the small scope of this paper, they only speak of the presidential elections.
From its early period, the United States has obtained an indirect type of democracy, and has always had contentment that its citizens are allowed to vote for their representatives, especially the President. Nevertheless, the amount of citizens that actually vote in nationwide elections has decreased noticeably over the years. Voter participation and turnout has been declining in the United States throughout history. Voter turnout, the percentage of eligible individuals who actually vote (Ginsberg), to this day is lower than it was in the 1900’s. Since 1912, presidential elections have only had about 50 to 65 percent of Americans participate. This means that about half of United States citizens who are eligible and have the freedom to vote have failed to participate in presidential elections. At the end of the nineteenth century voter turnout started plummeting, reaching the 60 percent level by the election of 1912 (Teixeira, 1987). The declining rate of voter participation in the United States is due to voter registration and procedu...
their vote, and a hole is punched into a ballot where the space for the
In the presidential primaries, closed primary voters tend to be seen more extreme than the voters in the open primary. Voters in a closed primary can only vote for the party they have registered themselves as through the voter’s registration form they are required to fill out before they are even eligible to vote. Norrander states that more independents vote in the open primaries rather than the closed primaries, unlike the republicans and democrats, because of the rules and party identification. In the states that conduct the primaries using party identification laws were seen to have more party members and few independents. In a survey, Norrander found that the higher level of voters who claimed to be independents were in the states that had either semi-closed primaries or open primaries. The fewest amount of independent voters was found in the semi-open and closed primary
Schmidt, S. W., Shelley, M. C., & Bardes, B. A. (2009). American Government and Politics Today. Mason: Cengage Learning.
A number of Americans fail to realize that when they vote they are not voting for the president and vice-president directly, but for electors who then cast their ballots in the Electoral College. Until the recent battle between Gov. George W. Bush and Vice-president Al Gore for the presidency, this new generation of American voters has never witnessed a controversial election. Historically, there have been problematic elections allowing voters to question this system. The Electoral College is now a process open to criticism and debate, specifically because many do not understand its origin or purpose today. On November 7, 2000, Election Day, I was excited to become an official voter. Considering myself mature, responsible, and finally of age to vote, I had mailed my registration, received my voter’s card, ready to become a participant in one of the most crucial events of the year. I was a faithful supporter of my candidate, crossing my fingers in hopes of victory. That night I watched CNN, eating my dinner and sipping a Diet Coke when the station announced Al Gore had won Florida, which held twenty-five electoral votes. Two hundred and seventy are needed to win, and presidential candidates Bush and Gore had switched leads all night.
During the United States Presidential Elections we are inundated with propaganda that insists we carry out our civic duty and cast a ballot which will help to determine who our nation’s next leader will be. The President of the United States is undoubtedly the most influential individual in our country so, of course, citizens must take the election process very seriously. Yet, how much influence do the voters of this democratic nation truly have on such an important decision? Unfortunately, many people are unaware of a voting process that takes place during each election. This process does not necessarily include the citizens of the United States and is known as Electoral College. It is the Electoral College that impedes on our nation’s democratic presidential election process and challenges its integrity as well.
The presidential election of the 1800s is considered one of the most consequential elections in US history. Many historians even call this election a revolution, of course, not in the literal sense at all. It was a revolution per say without bloodshed. In this election, it was between the Federalist party who favored Britain and the Republican party who favored the French. The two nominees, Adams vs. Jefferson, used harsh words, dirty newspaper articles, and rumors of war.