Electoral process and direct democracy 9 markers
Explain and analyse three strengths of the current process for selecting presidential candidates.
Firstly, the process is far too long and thus far too expensive. Primaries encourage early candidacy
announcements - such as Ted Cruz announcing 11 months before the first 2016 primary - leading to
long and costly campaigns. In 2016, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders raised over $500 million
between them just for the Democratic primary battle. Not only is this money which the party could
have better spent campaigning to beat their Republican opponent, it also leads to accusations of
candidates being ‘bought’ by big donors and pressure groups, thus making the process less
accountable.
Secondly, the process lacks peer review. Before the McGovern-Fraser Commission, candidates were
chosen by fellow professional politicians, whose expertise meant they were better placed to choose
a candidate with presidential qualities than ordinary voters. These professional politicians have to
work with successful candidates in government, especially across legislature-executive divides, a
clear problem in Donald Trump’s selection as the Republican candidate in 2016 – described by some
Republicans as a ‘hostile takeover’ – when he subsequently had difficulty working with his own
congressional party.
Lastly, the primary and caucus system could allow the emergence of more ideologically extreme
candidates. This could lead to further polarisation between the two final general election candidates
or, for parties, candidates not moderate enough to appeal to a wide base of voters. Primary voters
tend to be older, wealthier, better educated and more ideological than the average voter, meaning
more ideological candidates can do well, and primary results can be unrepresentative of the general
view.
Explain & analyse three criticisms of the electoral college system.
Most states allocate ECVs on 'winner takes all' basis. Could lead to majority of state opinion being
ignored. Occurs in 48 states (except Maine and Nebraska). Means election result distorted 8 occa-
sions 1960-2016. If a candidate comes a close second in lots of states those votes don’t get repres-
ented. Using a single plurality system distorts the outcome - 1980 Reagan got 50% vote but 90%
ECVs - half America did not want him to be President. 2000 Gore won 500000 more votes but lost
election. Came close second in lots then won rest by clear majority. 2016 Clinton won more votes
than ay other losing candidate in history.
Over-represents small states - al states have at least 3 ECVs regardless of population. California has
55 ECVs and population of 34 million. Wyoming has 3 EVCs and population of 500000. If California's
EVCs were allocated on same basis it would have 205. So therefore if you are in a more Populus state
your vote counts for less.
Encourages low turnout. In states where one party is dominant, no point voting for other party (safe
states). Votes are 'wasted' - 20 million people voted for Perot - votes were thinly distributed across
the entire country and as he didn’t have a plurality of the vote in any particular state he didn’t win a
single electoral vote.
Explain and analyse three advantages of the electoral college system/ Explain and analyse three
arguments they used to justify the Electoral College.
Produces a clear winner. The 'winner takes all' system helps to ensure that one candidate receives
more than 50 per cent of the electoral college votes. This gives the elected president greater
legitimacy, allowing them to govern more effectively. In 2012, Obama won 51 per cent of the
popular vote, but received 332 of the 538 ECV — nearly 62 per cent. Even when there is a strong
third-party candidate, one candidate typically receives an absolute majority. Despite the strong
,showing of Ross Perot in 1992 with 18.9 per cent of the popular vote, Clinton received 370 electoral
college votes .The system encourages a two-horse race, which usually provides the winner with a
secure mandate to govern. Even in the 2000 election, Bush achieved success in 30 states, with 271
Electoral College votes.
Respects the tradition of federalism and therefore protects smaller states. By basing voting in
individual states, the Founding Fathers emphasised the importance of states and state identity.
Candidates are required to win the support of states. Smaller states are deliberately
overrepresented to make sure they are not intimidated by larger states; California has 63 times the
population of Wyoming but only 18 times the ECV. The system protects small state interests, which
are overrepresented with three electors. Thus candidates must achieve success across all states, as
Obama did in 2012 when he won 26 states plus Washington DC.
Ensures widespread support: Candidates must have depth and breadth of support in order to win.
This was shown by Perot's failure to gain sufficient state support in 1992 to win any Electoral College
votes. Another example is the limited national support for the pro-segregationist candidate George
Wallace in 1968, which meant he failed to win any Electoral College voters outside the South.
Explain and analyse the voting behaviour of any three groups in US elections
Racial minorities overwhelmingly vote democrat. The support of the African American population
for the Democrats have never dipped below 83%, and 93% supported Obama’s re-election in 2012.
This arises from the likelihood that most African Americans will be on the poorer end of American
society, so as such will support Democrat attempts to support them. Historically African Americans
have supported the New Deal and Civil Rights, which have helped hugely in the support for the
Democrats. In addition to this the Democrats have more role models in the party for African
Americans. Furthermore, Clinton secured 88% AA vote, 65% of Asian and Latinx vote 2016, while
Trump won 58% of the white vote. Finally the Republican stance for being against affirmative action
is widely held to be racist among African Americans. Despite this level of support however, turnout is
very low among African Americans primarily due to parties ignoring them in electoral cycles.
81% of white evangelicals backed Trump in 2016, as did 60% of white Catholics
- 68% of those with no religious affiliation voted Democrat - 81% of white evangelicals backed Trump
in 2016, as did 60% of white Catholics
- 68% of those with no religious affiliation voted Democrat
Traditionally, Democrats secure more of the female vote. Obama won 55% of women's votes, while
Clinton won 54% in 2016. 53% of men voted Trump.
Explain and analyse three functions performed by national nominating conventions in the USA
today.
Party policies. Agrees on the policies its presidential candidate will campaign on and pursue if they
are elected. The platform committee forms policies based on hearings with citizens around the
country. The platform is presented to delegates at the party convention who will often agree to the
policies in the platform.- in 2016 democratic national convention; It included calls to raise the
minimum wage to $15- abolish the death penalty- more strictly regulate Wall Street- establish a
multi-millionaire surtax, and review existing trade agreements such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Used to choose the vp candidate although in recent campaigns the president has chosen vp already
and the convention simply confirms the choice as a formality. president will choose a vp candidate
based on political experience and appeal e.g 2016 Clinton announced via Twitter that she had
chosen Tim Kaine as her running ate
,Presidential candidate: chosen by a roll-call vote whereas the delegates from each state announce
the candidate they are voting for, this function has become less important because most delegates
are committed to voting for a specific candidate based on the primary vote rather than choosing for
themselves who to support. this means the primary vote, not the party convention chooses the
presidential candidate
Explain and analyse three ways in which independent candidates may be significant in US
politics.
The effect independent candidates have on the level of choice given to voters in Presidential
elections. This could be illustrated with examples of independent presidential candidates such as
George Wallace, Ross Perot or Ralph Nader.
Independent candidates as a mechanism for protest votes against the two main parties, or their
significance in raising political issues often ignored by the two main 'catch-all' parties, such as the
environment or budget deficits.
Impacting on the outcome by taking votes from one of the two main contenders as Perot did with
Bush Senior in 1992
Explain and analyse three criticisms of campaign finance in the USA
Election expenditure out of control – 2020 record
Fundraising distracts elected reps from doing their real job
3 days a week fundraising - not doing what they're supposed to be doing
Cost means that only the really wealthy get elected
Some one can potentially be a realistic contender in the primary's - Michael Bloomberg
spent 500million - weak argument though because it failed
Matching funds have died out.
In 2002 the FEC paid $240m in matching funds. In 2020 no one took it because if you don’t
claim them you can raise as much as you want, but if yo do you get capped
Matching funds are when the FEC will match what you raise up to a limit
Explain and analyse three factors that can affect the outcome of presidential elections in the USA.
Voter Turnout: Voter turnout is a crucial factor in determining the outcome of presidential elections.
The number of people who vote can greatly influence the election's results, particularly in close
races. For example, in the 2000 U.S. Presidential Election, voter turnout was significantly lower in
Florida compared to other states, and this likely contributed to George W. Bush's narrow victory in
that state.
Campaign Strategies: Campaign strategies can also greatly affect the outcome of presidential
elections. Candidates' messages, their choice of running mate, and their travel and advertising
strategies can all play a role in determining the election's outcome. For example, in the 2008 U.S.
Presidential Election, Barack Obama's strong use of social media and data-driven targeting helped
him secure a decisive victory over John McCain.
Economic Factors: The state of the economy can also greatly influence the outcome of presidential
elections. If the economy is strong and growing, voters are more likely to support the incumbent
party. However, if the economy is weak, voters are more likely to support the challenger. For
, example, in the 1980 U.S. Presidential Election, Jimmy Carter lost to Ronald Reagan in part due to a
weak economy and high unemployment.
Explain and analyse three ways in which the process for selecting presidential candidates is open
to criticism. (p292)
Lack of Representation: Critics argue that the current process for selecting presidential candidates
does not accurately represent the diversity of American voters. For example, the primary system is
dominated by early-voting states like Iowa and New Hampshire, which are not representative of the
country as a whole. This can result in candidates who are more attuned to the views of early-voting
states being chosen as the nominee, even if they are not as well-suited to represent the views of
other regions.
Money in Politics: The role of money in politics is also a major criticism of the process for selecting
presidential candidates. Candidates with the most money are often able to gain an advantage over
their rivals, both in terms of visibility and access to key voters. For example, in the 2016 U.S.
Presidential Election, billionaire Donald Trump was able to self-fund his campaign and dominate the
primary election, despite initially having low support from traditional GOP power brokers.
Influence of Party Leaders: Critics argue that the process for selecting presidential candidates is too
heavily influenced by party leaders and insiders, rather than by rank-and-file voters. For example,
the use of superdelegates in the Democratic Party primary process has been criticized for giving too
much power to party elites and insiders, rather than to the voters.
Explain and analyse three ways in which presidential primaries have become more important.
Increased Public Attention: One reason why presidential primaries have become more important is
due to increased public attention. As the process of selecting presidential candidates has become
more transparent and media coverage has increased, the public has become more interested in
following the primaries and supporting their preferred candidates. For example, the 2008
Democratic primary between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton was one of the most closely watched
and hotly contested primaries in recent history, attracting widespread media attention and drawing
large numbers of voters to the polls.
Changes to the Party Nomination Process: Another reason why primaries have become more
important is due to changes in the party nomination process. For example, the use of open
primaries, where voters who are not registered members of a political party can participate, has
become increasingly common. This has given more voters a voice in the selection of presidential
candidates and has made primaries a crucial part of the process.
Influence on General Election Outcomes: The outcome of the primaries can also have a major
impact on the outcome of the general election. For example, a strong performance in the primaries
can give a candidate momentum and help build support for the general election. Conversely, a weak
showing in the primaries can hurt a candidate's chances in the general election. As such, primaries
have become an increasingly important factor in determining who will be the next president of the
United States.
Explain and analyse three important roles still played by the national party conventions. (p292)
Nominating Candidates: The national conventions are still responsible for officially nominating the
presidential and vice-presidential candidates for each political party. During the convention,
