Caucuses are party meetings by precinct, district, or county, where registered party members gather to discuss the candidates and to select delegates to the next round of party conventions. Causcuses are held in geographically large but thinly populated states, and whilst they aim to achieve the same goals as primaries. In the 2012 election, 12 states exclusively held caucuses and 36 states held only primaries. While caucuses have a long history in American politics and hold some advantages over primaries, some critics believe they are not as democratic. A merit of this process lay in the fact that whilst turnout is low, those who are committed to the result of the election do turn out.
When evaluating the arguments raised on both sides it I believe that the Electoral College should be replaced by a national popular vote. An argument that exposes the weakness of the Electoral College and why it should be replaced by a national popular vote is because the ‘winner takes all’ system distorts the results of the elections. There have been various results in which the popular vote did not reflect the results of the Presidential election. A notorious example of how distorted results can be under the Electoral College is that of Bush and Al Gore in 2000. Though Al Gore won the popular vote by 48.4% Bush won the votes of the Electoral College which resulted in him winning the Presidential election.
A Presidential election was held in the year of 1972 in the United States. “The Presidential trip makes sense only if it is to serve the purpose of its domestic electoral impact.”12 Meaning, the president’s reasoning behind the trip is to get votes in the presidential election in November. To boost his credibility he broke twenty two years of policy and fear to impress upon the people of the United States that he was “a master of foreign policy”13 and the right man for the job. Nixon’s “dramatic and heroic decision” was publicized even more through television. The “drama” of the visit created hype as never seen before.14 The American people believed in the sentimentality of the trip.15 They really thought that this trip would change the course of the whole world forever, which needless to say, it was not.
The organization also publishes a monthly magazine known as the "Multinational Monitor." In 2001, Ralph Nader started up another non-profit organization known as Democracy Rising. This organization was dedicated to ending the War in Iraq, and bringing the troops back to America. The political opinions that Ralph Nader is so well known for would make him one of the highest rated presidents that America has ever seen. In his 2000 bid for the presidency Ralph Nader campaigned against the corporate powers dominance in the political landscape as well as the need for change in the manner of how presidential races are held.
Presidential Election of 2012 The Presidential election is a very important election that each of us should take seriously. In choosing a President for our country, we have to look at the candidates and decide which ones beliefs can help the county the most. This year, we have numerous candidates from the Republican Party and only one from the Democrat Party running for President of the United States. President elect Barack Obama, Democrat candidate, is gearing up for a second term; his major platforms are national healthcare, decreased unemployment rate and stimulating economy for the country. Presently, the national healthcare plan presented to Congress is one of great concern and after four years of debate is
There after joined the Senate in 1952. In 1956 he was nominated vice president for the presidential nominee Adlai Stevenson but lost. Finally in 1958 went back into the senate for his second term. As the television came into play so did his popularity. The televised presidential debate boosted his popularity lot.
Television has had a positive impact on how the presidential elections have set a course for the future since the 1960s, and in several various ways. The implementation of television into political affairs has not only allowed an opportunity for the people of America to obtain a clearer view of whom it is they’re allowing to lead the country as president, but also the ability to hold presidential candidates accountable for their actions, both in the past and present; resulting in an increased vetting of the candidates. During a campaign, it is historically evident that a candidate will discuss an irrelevant topic, yielding no beneficial value, in an attempt to appease his or her surrounding audience. The television allows people of all age groups to see for themselves what the presidential candidate has to say, allowing for no biased presidential elections. An example of this is President Lyndon Johnson’s 1968 reelection campaign.
Clinton's testicle lockbox is big enough for the entire Democrat hierarchy, not just some people in the media." , and then there was Chris Matthews and he said , “The reason she's a U.S. senator, the reason she's a candidate for president, the reason she may be a front-runner is her husband messed around." . Although these are clearly Republican pundits, these remarks made people start thinking more of her as a woman rather that a qualified person for President. My Grandfather, a die hard Democratic, believes that Bill Clinton was the best president we have ever had, but he thought maybe Mr. Clinton came out a little arrogant.
Howard’s leadership was based on ‘strong leadership,’ strong leaders claim that they can create national unity amongst other things. This is how Howard won the 2001 and 2004 elections. In 2007, John Howard lost the election because the voters failed to see him as the best leader. By March 2007, Rudd had the best poll results ever for an Opposition leader. This was because the government had problems with their policies and mandates, also because voters believed that John Howard had been Prime Minister for too long.
They can form an election and re-elect a new leader. Granting the prime minister is leading the country towards a brighter future and the people are happy with the way there country is being led She/ He could stay in power for as long as it takes. For example John Howard served for 11 years. And on the other hand if we were a republic like America once we voted in out leader we are stuck with them for a 2 term period which each term consists of 4 years this gives a lot of freedom for the leader to potentially send the country into a downward spiral although it gives the leader a chance to lead and do well for the country unlike a democracy where they make one small mistake and be kicked out not allowing the leader to do