Although most states hold primaries, caucuses are another way political parties nominate candidates for election. Caucuses are a series of meetings held across a state. At these meetings, party members discuss the candidates, and then openly vote for state delegates who represent the candidate they support. Those state delegates, in turn, choose delegates to attend the national convention, where they are expected to support the candidate whom they had pledged to support. one reason why caucuses are an appropriate means of selecting a candidate are that caucuses could reinvigorate interest in the nominating process.
The Electoral College also unequally apportions electoral votes due to the significant population increase since it was established. The Electoral College is created by Article II of the Constitution, and is further outlined in the 12th Amendment. As described by Nicholas R Miller, “designing the mode of selecting the President was one of the most difficult tasks that confronted the framers,” (3). In determining how to elect the president, the delegates to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 considered three options: appointment by legislature, a direct election by the people, or a hybrid of both. Appointment by legislature was considered, as that was the method most states used to elect the governor; however, delegates feared it would upset the balance of the three branches of government by making the president beholden to congress (Johnson 12-13).
Labour also receives these, but a large chunk of its income comes from trade unions. Lib Dem’s have also been boosted by large donations in recent years. Along with donations the UK also has a form of state funding. Opposition parties receive money to pay for administration and other costs. Otherwise, the ruling party - with its access to the instruments of government, such as the civil service - would have an unfair advantage.
It states that elections should be held every two years. This was meant to obviously keep up with the populace ideals. Because you need to hold relatively frequent elections to truly capture what the people want, and if you had these Representatives growing old in the house without elections the people lose their voice and the government becomes an Aristocracy. Then, as far as who qualifies for the position the states and federal government compromise. For, every state is a Republic as guaranteed by the Constitution, and every state has its own form of House of Representatives and Senate.
There were many factors throughout the election which had an impact which I will explain below. The first factor which determined the outcome of the 2008 presidential election was the fact that Obama was backed by the elites and the wealthy, the most notable elite being Warren Buffet. These elites gave as much money as the laws enabled them to but they also gave Obama their names, a strong PR move which gave Obama the edge as people who looked up to the endorsers would then side with them. These two factors also argue that elitism outweighs pluralism in America, and that elitism was so strong, that it determined the outcome with supporters of for example Warren Buffet voting for who he endorsed. However, there is also reason to suggest that this is not the case, and that pluralism determined the outcome of the 2008 election.
Our Founding Fathers’ legacies have laid a path for America to follow, sidestepping injustice and promoting American ideals. Our Founding Fathers’ creation of the Electoral College was the guiding hand of America’s government and since 1787, electoral voting had always been used in presidential elections. It had been used for more than two hundred years and since then, no major problems have arisen. This month’s resolution is resolved: Direct popular vote should replace electoral vote in presidential elections. My partner and I strongly urge you to negate the resolution due to the following contentions: Contention #1: The Electoral College can enhance the ideologies of the Democratic and Republican parties.
Structure and make up of Congress * Legislative branch * powers of Congress are defined in Article I of the U.S. Constitution * 2 chambers: The U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives * Almost all members of Congress are elected on the basis of their political party affiliation. They run as either Republicans or Democrats. Gerrymandering and Racial Gerrymandering * Gerrymandering-process in which a voting district is broken up or the physical boundaries of a voting district are changed in order to make it easier for one political party to win future elections * Racial Gerrymandering-The deliberate drawing of district boundaries to secure an advantage for one race. Who can become member of congress? *
Due to the fact that there is a direct correlation between the candidate who spent the most money on their campaign, and the eventual winner of the election, suggests that whoever spends the most money on their campaign will ultimately become president. In 2008 Barrack Obama won the election after spending over $750million on his campaign. John McCain spent $370,000million, less than half of what Obama spent. Over $425million of Obama’s money went towards the media, when you consider the fact that McCain spent under $130 million on the media it is clear that Obama was in the public eye a lot more frequently, therefore the average voter would have been constantly hearing positivity around Obama in the newspapers and on TV, and less about McCain, meaning that they would feel more inclined to vote for him as they have a greater idea of who he is and what he is doing. This suggests why Obama won the key swing states, Ohio, Florida, Virginia and Pennsylvania.
This system is known as Direct Election and includes instant runoff voting. Instant runoff voting is a voting system in which voters rank the candidates in order of preference using one ballot. If no candidate has the majority of votes they then eliminate the candidates with the lowest number of votes until they are down to the last candidate with the most number of votes. This process saves the government a lot of time and money. This would cause the candidates to feel it necessary to campaign in every state.
Patrick Youssef AP Comp 23 October 2014 One Vote, Big Change One of the major concerns in the USA is the number of voters casting ballets during elections. The U.S. Government is always trying to promote ways of convincing people to vote. If even a small percentage of eligible voters decided to vote in the main battle states, the entire outcome of an election could change. As I mentioned before, even a slight change in the amount of votes could affect the entire outcome. For example, President Obama succeeded in winning Virginia, Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania in the 2012 election.