Many people felt unsure with him as president and, therefore, felt unsafe about how he ran the economy. This caused many people to pull out of the stock market, which caused businesses to fail. Michael Moore's introduction to Stupid White Men may not be completely factual, but he certainly has a point. Twenty first century America is going downhill and people are just sitting around watching it fall. Bush did not receive the majority vote in the 2000 election, but he did not cause all that is wrong in America.
Election Problems Even though my experience may be limited in politics, I still understand how grave of a situation it is having everything controlled by the republicans, because with total domination of one party the democratic system is weighed heavily to one side. Even some republicans agree that dominance over every branch is a problem. It is false hope for the President and his colleagues to think that just because they won the election that every person who voted for them is supporting their conservative ways and plans. This distorted image could possibly have been humbled if the electoral system was different. In many states Bush only won by 2% but all of the electoral votes went to him, despite the fact that 50% of voters chose a different candidate.
Voters in many areas of the U.S. are apt to vote differently as a whole from election to election. The nation has also had a decreased turnout rate for the presidential and local elections. The South has typically not followed these patterns that the rest of has seemed to be following. The Southern whites of the U.S. have typically followed and voted for the more conservative candidate and party. Where as the Southern blacks have typically (when they have been able to vote) voted for the more liberal party or candidate.
One serious flaw in the Electoral College system is that the popular vote winner does not always win Presidency. This is a result of two factors. “In each State the winning candidate customarily receives all that State’s electoral votes”(343). For example, in 1992 Bill Clinton received barely 50% to win New ... ... middle of paper ... ...rly History of the Electoral College, 1). This method cannot be the best if it has flaws.
Conservatives voted for Bush 4-to-1 while liberals voted for Dukakis 4-to-1. Unfortunately for Dukakis, there were about twice as many conservatives as liberals. Dukakis was hurt also by the low voter turnout. About 510f the voting age public voted in the 1988 Presidential election, the lowest post World War 2 percentage. The low voter turnout helped Bush immensely.
The response of the public is to tune out. Few are paying close attention to campaign news, while at the same time an increasing number of people think the press is overcovering the campaigns. Not surprisingly in this light, many Americans cannot even name a single candidate for the two parties' nominations. Fully 37% of Federal Election Commission's respondents could not offer up the name of a GOP candidate, and even more -- 50% -- could not name a Democratic candidate, without prompting. Public inattention to the campaign is about the only hopeful sign in this survey for Al Gore's candidacy.
Broadly put, the reasons the electorate DID NOT vote for the Conservative party were that they seemed, old, tired, divided and sleazy. This can be seen in that the average age of a Conservative MP was over 50 and 44% of over 65s voted for them, their campaigning was limited, there was internal conflict over many issues such as the Economy and Europe. The leader, John Major, was also seen as weak and indecisive. The problems the Conservatives faced during their term badly affected them when the voting came; and the fact their support was spread through the country meant that they were at a disadvantage due to FPTP (they failed to win constituencies). These various weaknesses meant that people were reluctant to re-elect the Conservatives, therefore much of the electorate were looking for another party to vote for.
That same public mood helps to influence the failure of the press to apply sufficient skepticism to the president's rationale for the invasion of Iraq, the conflict that will define his presidency. Nevertheless, the results of the 2004 election give Bush the public mandate and congressional support he needs to sustain his policies in Iraq and the war on terror. His re-election, also gives him a stronger base to pursue a conservative domestic agenda. Bush strengthened his showing from the 2000 election, in which he lost the popular vote to Vice President Al Gore but won the electoral count a month later. In 2004, President Bush supporters were loyal towards his leadership qualities, likeability, values, terro... ... middle of paper ... ...s are driving voters' decisions.
Race-baiting destroys the middle class but that is not the first thought on politician’s minds; politicians just want to be elected and reelected. He would have lost the election if he openly was racist and crude but instead he talked about cutting taxes; which would be an economic approach that would directly affect blacks. He painted a picture of the New Deal as favoring minorities because he associated them as the impoverished. Also, he ran with the idea of less government involvement. Which is why he stood for repealing the New Deal.
In all the years that the electoral college has been established, only 6 elections occurred where the popular vote didn’t match who won the electoral votes ("Presidents Winning Without Popular Vote - FactCheck.org"). However, this still makes people feel as their vote did not count, and discourages voters. Critics of the electoral point out how this method frustrates voters, it makes them feel contrary to what is being told to them, that their vote indeed does count. Another issue with the electoral college it does not help support the minority candidate. The Majority parties are the Democrats and Republicans.