Jeffersonian and Jacksonian Democracy Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson were both big influential political figures in two different eras. In their Jeffersonian and Jacksonian Democracy they had a lot of political, economic, social, and religious beliefs. Each formed their own democracy that helped shape the way the government is today. Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson had a couple of similarities in their democracy but they also had a lot of differences too. These men both had good ideas and tried hard to help the United States be the best it can be.
Jackson was quite unlike any other president of the United States. Previously ii had been about aristocracy but once Jackson came to power it was about democracy. He liked the fact that he was closely associated to the common man and this is why he was so popular. “Era of the common man” is the title given by the Jacksonians. Jackson’s inauguration took place on the 4th of March, 1829.
Jackson had also received a large number of the votes in Missouri which in turn gave many of Jackson’s supporters the majority in the General Assembly. Jackson and his supporters believed that the U.S. Supreme Court was a tool used in creating a strong federal government which took away powers from the states, an ideology that Adams and his supporters fully supported. This was unacceptable according to President Jackson and the Jacksonians which called for judiciary reform. With President Jackson firmly positioned in the White House this gave the Jacksonians the opportunity to seek such reforms. The Jacksonians first political action in Missouri was to limit federal judges’ terms in office and to make it harder for them to overturn state and congressional legislation.
This mission included not only gaining land but also pushing forward the freedoms of mankind. O. Sullivan and Democrats alike supported this sentiment because their political belief was to annex land as soon as possible. Although this idea was popular among many, this popularity was not unanimous throughout the nation. For example, in a letter to one of the most influential Whigs, Henry Clay, William Channing wrote that America is a restless nation whose only goal is to boast about national growth and expansion. This is significant because it demonstrates how double-sided the issue really was, and showcases the negative aspect of Manifest Destiny, mainly restlessness and greed.
Why this Leader was successful What made President Franklin Roosevelt a successful leader was that he had so many styles that was unique and capable in accomplishing tasks as president of the United States. Roosevelt had gained the attention of the Americans with his democratic leadership style. “A democratic leader is one that is primarily concern with human relations and teamwork, communication that is open and usually two-way, and creates a spirit of collaboration with joint effort that results in a staff satisfaction” (Sullivan, 2009, p. 46). President Roosevelt had these and more to accomplish the goals he set out to do. His charismatic style allowed him to connect with the Americans, especially during the Great Depression.
He had constant run-ins with the law which made his leadership very controversial. But in truth, Tupac was just a regular human being like the rest of us. Bill Clinton cheating on his wife doesn’t take away from the fact that he was a great president. The Government criticized Tupac for his abrasive lyrics and degradation of women, but he was only being raw and uncut about what was going on in society. He didn’t degrade women either, he highly respected them.
A good leader is one who may have some “dirt” in his/her record but acknowledges his imperfections and continues for the betterment of his organization or mission. Bill Clinton in the opinion of this writer has had numerous personal discretions that he that was intended for the attempted to differentiate from his role as leader of the United States of America. Charisma is also a trait of an effective leader. A charismatic leader can draw others to himself and mission by employing empathy and respect for his colleagues despite their possible differences. Although Mr. Clinton is a past U.S. president, he is recognized as a leader in the global arena because of his willingness to adapt various skill sets when
Because some populations are so high in certain areas, a large amount of the representatives elected to the House, anti-federalists feared, would be only the prominent and wealthy men of the area. This meant that even more power would be given to the government with the titles the men already had before being elected. Not only did the power of the government make the anti-federalists nervous, the lack of a bill of rights kept them agreeing with the constitution. They wanted a set rights guaranteed so that the central government didn’t have all the power that the anti-federalists were afraid of. The anti-federalist’s opposition to the constitution was
There are many merits to having the Electoral College System: This requires a distribution of popular support to be elected for President, it enhances minority’s interests and encourages the two-party system. But as there are merits, there are also many disadvantages to having electors elect the president, such as electing a minority president, the electors may depress the voter turnout, or they could just choose whoever they want to without even thinking about the voters rights. Many people have a take strong liking to the Electoral College System but at the same time many people don’t. Throughout its 200 year span many people have taken huge steps to try and eliminate it completely, feeling as if it was unfair and didn’t give the people any say so, but what they don’t realize is that the Electoral College System is based on allowing the people to have a say in who’s running their country. Some of the concerns of the people as stated before are: electing a minority President, electors depressing the voter turnout, and them just choosing who they want without listening to the people.
On the other hand, the anti-imperialists argued that it went against our American democracy and was harmful to the territories we were trying to acquire and our country itself. Even though they had a major difference, they had one similarity in that they both wanted the country to progress and become more successful through overseas expansion, just not using imperialismto justify it. Imperialist thought it was their duty to take over the smaller countries in order to save them from themselves because they were not fit for self government. Behind the imperialists were a plethora of people and they all supported it for multiple reasons. Blacks at the time liked the idea because it gave them an opportunity to serve their country and have perfect unity with the whites as well as patriotic unity for themselves (doc1).