Essay plans - Electoral systems Flashcards

Question

What are the Advantages of Primaries?

Answer 1

DEMOCRATIC They are highly democratic. Primaries are highly democratic devices compared to the earlier selection processes involving choices made by party bosses in “smoke filled rooms” - reduces the chance of corruption by party bosses which could alienate voters and cause political apathy. Primaries involve the voters themselves (especially open primaries) making their own choices as to their preferred candidate. This opens up the nomination process to outsiders who wouldn’t have been chosen by the party bosses, such as Bill Clinton (1992) and Barack Obama (2008). The electorate may just pick the candidate who is in the lead (the bandwagon effect) or the candidate who looks the best (the style over substance effect). BEST CANDIDATES SHOWN They are good at showing who the best candidates are. Primaries weed out unsuitable candidates for the presidency. They test the candidates’ stamina on the long campaign trail and their fund-raising and oratorical skills, all of which are important qualities for a potential president. In 2008, many suggested that Obama was a stronger candidate because of his long, gruelling primary battle with Hillary Clinton. The candidate is more likely to be a better president who will make better policy decisions. HOWEVER, the wealthiest candidate often wins, rather than the best candidate. OPEN PRIMARIES Encourage voters from both sides to participate. Any registered voter can vote in either the Republican/Democrat primary but not both (regardless of their party affiliation). E.g., Used in 16 states such as Texas. Encourages politicians to have wider appeal, usually moderate voters – filtering extreme candidates and good preparation for election. However, can favour candidates with lots of money and high media profile, voters may be ill-informed. Open primaries attract higher turnout, especially when one party has a competitive race e.g., in 2012, 10/11 Rep primaries had turnout increase incl. Mississippi’s of 105% and Wisconsin 92%. However, only 2/15 with closed primaries saw an increase – NY down 71% and Connecticut down 61%.

Answer 2

UNREPRESENTATIVE They are dominated by extreme voters. The members of the electorate who turnout to primaries and caucuses are generally old, white, educated, affluent and ideological, therefore they are unrepresentative of the whole electorate - Trump was able to win the 2016 Republican primaries due to being popular with old, white, Christian voters. More centrist candidates are under pressure to appeal to these ideological voters; therefore, they may become more extreme in their views. Mitt Romney became more extreme in the 2012 primaries. May lead to a candidate being selected who may infringe on the civil rights of minorities, such as Donald Trump – pardoned Joe Arpaio in 2017 who had been racially profiling Latino Americans in Arizona - may put off minority voters, causing apathy and low turnout. They are dominated by the wealthiest candidates. It is necessary to raise very large amounts of money in order to create “momentum” for the long and very costly campaigns caused by frontloading. Clinton raised more than $700m whereas Trump raised $400m but he was able to contribute $66m of his own money. Kamala Harris had to withdraw her campaign in 2019 due to a lack of funds. Means that less wealthy members of the electorate are less represented. LOW TURNOUT They have low turnout. 28.5% of estimated eligible voters voted in 2016 primaries. The 2008 Iowa caucus had a record turnout for a presidential caucus which was about 8 times the average, but even then, turnout was only 16.3%. Gives the winner less of a mandate, so less legitimacy and authority. Undermines the democratic advantages of primaries. FRONTLOADING They are too long due to frontloading. The number of states holding their primaries or caucuses before the end of March increased from just 11 in 1980 to 50 in 2016. This means that the winner of the primaries may have been decided before certain states get to vote. By February 2008, 55% of delegates to the Democratic and Republican conventions had already been chosen. Leads to “permanent campaigns” that alienate voters and result in low turnout. Puts too much stress on early, unrepresentative states, which is undemocratic and unfair.

Answer 3

PRODUCES A MAJORITY It is very stable as it produces as president with a majority. In the 2012 presidential election, Obama received 332 electors, whereas Mitt Romney only received 206 electors, therefore Obama had a clear mandate and legitimacy. In the 2016 presidential election, Trump received 304 electors, whereas Clinton only received 227 electors, therefore Trump had a clear mandate and legitimacy. Having a majority means the president has a mandate, legitimacy and authority. Stability means there are less likely to be political disturbances, which in the most serious but unlikely of cases could cause a revolution. HOWEVER, they can win without winning pop vote e.g. 2016. FAIR It awards electors based on population size, which is fair. The number of electors a state has is the number of Senators and Congressmen who represent the state - Alaska has 3 electors due to its small population of around 737,000 and California has 55 electors due to its large population of around 38.8 million. The 23rd Amendment gave 3 electors to the District of Columbia so they would be represented in the Electoral College. Re-districting also leads to fairness because states which grow in population are rewarded by more electors or with less as their population falls. Preserves the voice of small-pop states – if the election depended solely on the popular vote, then candidates could limit campaigning to heavily populated areas or specific regions. HOWEVER, there is under and over-representation of certain states e.g. HOWEVER, there is under and over-representation of certain states e.g. In 2016, California had 55 EC votes and Wyoming had 3 – this means that California had 1 electoral vote for every 713,000 whereas Wyoming had 1 for every 195,000. NO AGREED ALTERNATIVE There aren’t any agreed alternatives. Only two states (Maine and Nebraska) use the congressional district method, which is where electors are given based on the winners of each congressional district, with the state-wide winner receiving two additional votes - still creates lots of wasted votes and can actually produce an even less proportional result to the simple plurality method. A proportional system or a popular vote system could be used - this would, however, make it much less likely that a candidate would win an absolute majority. Keeping the Electoral College would mean a constitutional amendment wouldn’t have to be passed, which could be difficult and take a long time.

Answer 4

WINNER TAKES ALL SYSTEM The winner-takes-all, simple plurality system, which is used in 48 of the states, distorts the popular vote. In 2000, Bush gained 50.4 million votes and 271 electors, whereas Al Gore gained more votes (50.9 million) but fewer electors (266). In 2016, Hilary Clinton won nearly 3m more votes, but Trump won 77 more in EC. The system also creates a lot of wasted votes. In 2012, 37% of California’s electorate (4.8 million people) voted for Mitt Romney, but Obama won the state, therefore these 4.8 million votes for Romney were wasted because they didn’t help him win a single elector. It could be argued that the winner may lack a popular mandate, therefore lack legitimacy. SWING STATES The campaigns focus on swing states. Between May to Election Day 2012, Obama and Romney made a total of 35 visits to Ohio, 31 visits to Florida and 29 to Virginia. In the 2012 Presidential Election, 38 states were not visited a single time by the candidates because they were not swing states. Between April 11th and Election Day 2012, Obama spent $314.8 million on TV ads, of which 99.6% was spent in just 10 states. May cause apathy in non-swing states - could lead to lower turnout. Undemocratic and unfair on voters in non-swing states. THIRD PARTIES Third party candidates don’t stand a chance. In the 1992 Presidential election, Ross Perot stood as an independent candidate and gained 18.9% of the popular vote but didn’t gain the plurality of the vote in any states, therefore he received no electors at the Electoral College. There were 5 third party candidates in the 2012 presidential election, but none received any Electoral College votes. Libertarian Gary Johnson won over 4m votes in 2016 and no EC votes. Voters who don’t agree with the two main parties are less represented. Voters have less choice, which goes against the principles of a pluralist democracy.

Answer 5

LIMITS ON HARD MONEY There are restrictions on individuals, corporations, banks, unions, parties and PACS. Federal Election Campaign Act (1971) – parties and PACs had to report all donations over $100 and donations over $5000 had to be reported with 48 hours. Federal Election Campaign Act (1974) - limited PAC donations to candidates to $5,000. It also limited individual donations to a candidate to $1,000 and banned contributions from foreign donors. Buckley v Valeo (1976) - restrictions and disclosure rules were upheld. McCutcheon v Federal Election Commission (2014) left intact the $2,600 limit on contributions to a single candidate by a single donor. HOWEVER, can get around these regulations by forming: Super PACs, 527 Groups, 501(c)4 groups and McCutcheon v Federal Election Commission (2014) struck down caps limiting the total amount a single donor could donate to different federal campaigns/parties over a 2-year period. BAN ON SOFT MONEY The Federal Election Campaign Act (1979) – allowed individuals, unions and corporations to give unlimited donations to parties as soft money. The amount of soft money raised by the Republican Nation Committee increased from $49.8 million in 1992 to $141.2 million in 1996. Bi-Partisan Campaign Reform Act (2002) - banned soft money from being raised by national party committees. McConnell v Federal Election Commission (2003) – the Bi-Partisan Campaign Reform Act’s ban on soft money did not violate free speech. Should create more public confidence in finance regulations, so could help to reduce apathy. HOWEVER, all organisations other than national party committees, such as Super PACs, can still donate unlimited amounts of soft money to candidates. SUCCESSES Many campaigns have succeeded without the overbearing influence of the wealthy. In 2008, the Obama campaign made up most of their war chest through donations from individuals of $250 or less In 2008, 527 groups did not spend as much due to rules surrounding donations coming as hard money. 57% of individual donations to the Obama campaign in 2012 were made up of contributions under $200. In 2004, Bush and Kerry kept within the federally mandated limits after using matched funding agreements for the General Election i.e., after accepting the party’s nomination.

Answer 6

INSUFFICIENT REGULATION OF TV ADS Buckley v Valeo (1976) - campaign finance laws can only restrict speech that “expressly advocated” the election or defeat of a candidate. By 1996, 90% of “issue ads” named a candidate. 527 Groups increased after the Bi-Partisan Campaign Reform Act (2002) because they focus on issue advocacy outside of the time regulations and can accept unlimited sums but must disclose donors. Citizens United v Federal Election Commission (2010) - ruled unconstitutional to restrict spending on TV ads - led to the creation of Super PACs - 1,310 Super PACs created by the 2012 Election and they raised over $828 million. The “Restore Our Future” Super PAC spent $142 million supporting Romney in 2012. The electorate can be unfairly influenced by wealthy groups through TV ad spending. In the 2012 election, the top 1% of donors to Super PACs donated 68% of the money. Prevents the electorate being properly educated on political issues. CANDIDATE SPENDING LIMITS There are no limits on spending by candidates on their own campaigns. Federal Election Campaign Act (1971) – imposed limits for candidate spending to $50,000 for Presidential and VP candidates, $35,000 for Senate candidates and $25,000 for House candidates. Buckley v Valeo (1976) ruled that it is unconstitutional to restrict spending by candidates on their own campaigns because this would violate freedom of speech. In 1992, the billionaire Ross Perot was able to be a moderately successful third candidate due to his personal spending on his campaign. Trump spent $66m of his own money which contributed to his win in 2016. Views of the wealthy may be better represented and Easier for the wealthy candidates to win. DECLINE IN PUBLIC FINANCING Revenue Act (1971) – candidates could receive $20 million in public funds Federal Election Campaign Act (1974) - expanded public financing. 2008 Presidential Election – Obama refused public funding and raised $745 million during the primaries/election, whereas his opponent John McCain accepted public funding so only got $84.1 million in the election. 2012 Presidential Election – Obama and Mitt Romney turned down public funds. May put off candidates from different backgrounds, reducing voter choice. This may increase apathy and decrease participation.

Answer 7

THE PEOPLE GET A SAY IN DECISION MAKING In 2012, there were 115 referendums and 42 initiatives/propositions. California voters rejected the 2010 “California Proposition 23” which would have unpopularly suspended a state law requiring reductions in GHG emissions. There have been three recall elections of state governors. Between 1913 and 2012, there were 36 recall elections of state legislators. Highly democratic, more in line with the idea of a government of the people, by the people, for the people, educates the electorate. ENCOURAGES WIDER POLITICAL PARTICIPATION The 2012 “Colorado Amendment 64” initiative on marijuana had 68.55% turnout. The 2012 recall election of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker had a turnout of 57.8%. Direct democracy turnout is often higher than election turnout, for example turnout at Presidential elections was 57.1% in 2008 and 54.9% in 2012. The results have a greater mandate, so are more legitimate, and reduces apathy. In 2013, the Oregon state legislature passed Senate Bill 833, which made four-year driver licenses available to individuals without any legal documents to prove they were living in the US legally. Opposition groups soon gathered 71,000 signatures, enough to trigger a referendum, and in 2014, 66% of voters voted against the new law. CHECK ON REPRESENTATIVES It acts as a check and balance on unpopular decisions by representatives. Four Republican Wisconsin State Senators were successfully removed from office by recall elections in 2012, which acted as a check and balance on them by voters who were dissatisfied with their conservative policies. A number of states require referendums to approve of changes to the state constitution, which acts as a check and balance against unpopular constitution changes. In-line with the Constitution’s idea of preventing tyrannical representatives. In 2003, California was facing an energy crisis - many voters blamed the crisis in part on the state Governor Gray Davis, and a Republican-led campaign soon gathered the signatures to trigger a recall vote. Voters were first asked whether Governor Davis should be recalled, to which 55% of voters said yes.

Answer 8

FINANCIAL ADVANTAGE Wealthier and more powerful sides may have the advantage. “Maryland Question 6” initiative in 2012 on same-sex marriage - the side in favour raised $4.1 million, whereas the side against only raised $1.7 million. The result in favour of incumbent Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker in his 2012 recall election could have been affected by Walker spending $30 million, whereas his opponent Tom Barrett only spent $4 million. Means that the interests of the poor are less likely to be represented. Could increase political apathy the idea that political decisions can be “bought”. HOWEVER, wealthier sides may be justified in spending more because they may have a greater mandate due to having more supporters to give them donations. ELECTORATE The electorate may make a bad decision. The 2010 “Arizona Proposition 107” rejected affirmative action which could have helped minorities to get better opportunities. In 2012, Wisconsin State Senator Van Wanggaard lost his seat in a recall election by gaining 49% of the vote (not a maj), suggesting that the support for his removal was only a very slim majority - could have been for political reasons. Could lead to tyranny of the majority, meaning there could be a possible discriminatory effect on minorities. QUESTION The questions can be made biased or slanted. The 2012 “Maine Question 1” initiative question seemed to be slanted in favour of same-sex marriage - "Do you want to allow the State of Maine to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples?" The 2014 “Washington Initiative 594” on universal background checks for gun purchases seemed to be slanted in favour of background checks – “Should this measure be enacted into law?” May reduce the legitimacy of the outcome, so it may have a lesser mandate. Increases the idea of tyrannical representatives acting in a dictatorship. However, the scrutiny provided by the media should help to prevent biased or slanted questions.

Answer 9

FINANCIAL ADVANTAGE Wealthier and more powerful sides may have the advantage. “Maryland Question 6” initiative in 2012 on same-sex marriage - the side in favour raised $4.1 million, whereas the side against only raised $1.7 million. The result in favour of incumbent Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker in his 2012 recall election could have been affected by Walker spending $30 million, whereas his opponent Tom Barrett only spent $4 million. Means that the interests of the poor are less likely to be represented. Could increase political apathy the idea that political decisions can be “bought”. HOWEVER, wealthier sides may be justified in spending more because they may have a greater mandate due to having more supporters to give them donations. ELECTORATE The electorate may make a bad decision. The 2010 “Arizona Proposition 107” rejected affirmative action which could have helped minorities to get better opportunities. In 2012, Wisconsin State Senator Van Wanggaard lost his seat in a recall election by gaining 49% of the vote (not a maj), suggesting that the support for his removal was only a very slim majority - could have been for political reasons. Could lead to tyranny of the majority, meaning there could be a possible discriminatory effect on minorities. QUESTION The questions can be made biased or slanted. The 2012 “Maine Question 1” initiative question seemed to be slanted in favour of same-sex marriage - "Do you want to allow the State of Maine to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples?" The 2014 “Washington Initiative 594” on universal background checks for gun purchases seemed to be slanted in favour of background checks – “Should this measure be enacted into law?” May reduce the legitimacy of the outcome, so it may have a lesser mandate. Increases the idea of tyrannical representatives acting in a dictatorship. However, the scrutiny provided by the media should help to prevent biased or slanted questions.

Answer 10

PARTY IDENTIFICATION The exit polls strongly suggest that partisanship was one of the most important influences on voting behaviour in 2016. 89% of Dems voted for Clinton and 90% of Reps voted for Trump. These figures are 3% lower than in 2012 – smaller drop than expected. While many Democrats and Republicans were vocally critical of their party’s While third party candidates did increase their vote share from 2012 by 2%, the majority of independent voter ended up voting for either Clinton or Trump. It seems that partisanship was even more significant than ideology. Exit polls suggest that only 8% of Clinton supporters voted for a Republican Representative, and even fewer Trump supporters also voted for a Democratic Representative. Not only that, but every state that elected a Republican Senator also voted for Trump, while every state that elected a Democratic Senator also voted for Clinton. AGE The Democrats tend to have much stronger support from younger voters, and, while this was still the case in 2016, there was a noticeable drop from 2012. Younger liberal voters had been particularly enthusiastic for Democratic primary candidate Bernie Sanders, who had championed a much more liberal platform. The 4% drop in support from 18-24-year olds, and even sharper 7% drop in support from 25-29-year olds, shows that Clinton struggled to reproduce the excitement generated by Barack Obama’s 2008 and 2012 campaigns. This lack of enthusiasm did not result in a sharp swing towards the Republican Party, but it did lead to significant gains for third party candidates. RACE/GENDER The Republican Party tended to have much stronger support from more college educated, professional white voters. But in 2016, Trump had a 37-point lead from white voters without degrees. This is much higher than the 26-point lead that Romney had in 2012. One argument is that Trump’s opposition to free trade, and frequent promises to ‘bring back’ jobs that had been exported overseas, resonated strongly with workers living in areas that had lost manufacturing jobs - felt that only an outsider like Trump would be able to challenge the ‘Washington establishment’. While Clinton had stronger support from female voters, it was still weaker than many had predicted prior to the election. During one of the televised debates, Clinton told the audience that Trump was someone who had “called women pigs, slobs and dogs”. Video footage was also released of Trump making degrading comments. Yet, overall Clinton was 1-point down amongst women, leading to speculation that any personal feelings women had about Trump’s comments were overridden by other, seemingly more important factors. Trump described Mexican immigrants as criminals and rapists, claimed a judge was biased and ‘hostile’ because of his Hispanic heritage, and promised to deport millions of illegal immigrants and build a wall along the Mexican border. Based on their own exit polls and interviews, they estimated that 79% voted for Clinton, with only 18% voting for Trump - slightly stronger support from Black, Hispanic and Asian voters than Romney did in 2012. In 2012, 93% of African Americans voted for Barack Obama. Women are generally more supportive of government intervention in the economy, welfare and affirmative action. Women are generally more supportive of liberal social policies and are against foreign military intervention. However, marriage could be more important because married voters tend to be white, older, religious and have a higher income. In 2012, 46% of married women voted for Obama compared to 67% of non-married women. RELIGION In recent decades, Democrats have tended to receive stronger support from Catholic and Jewish voters, while Republicans perform best with Protestants and Evangelical Christians. Many speculated whether Trump’s controversial statements about women and minorities, combined with the fact that he has been divorced twice, would make it difficult for Evangelical Christians to support him. However, exit polls show that, of this group (which makes up roughly one-fifth of all registered voters), 81% voted Trump, and just 16% Clinton. Protestants and white Catholics also favoured Trump, although to a lesser degree. The more frequently voters attend church, the more likely they are to vote for the Republicans due to the church being socially conservative. In 2012, 70% of Protestants who attended church at least weekly voted for Romney INCOME As a result of their support for more redistributive tax policies, welfare and worker rights, Democrats have traditionally had much stronger backing from lower income and unionised voters. However, one of the explanations given for Trump’s surprising victory was his appeal to working class voters who feel that they have been badly affected by globalisation and free trade deals. Clinton won a majority of the vote from those earning under $49,000, there was still a considerable drop from 2012. Much of this loss translated into increased support for third party candidates, but Trump saw increased support from those earning under $30,000 by 4 points. Clinton also lost considerable support from households belonging to a union. Trump’s plans to renegotiate longstanding free trade deals, impose tariffs on foreign nations, and deport millions of illegal immigrants had led to a great deal of economic uncertainty, and it is possible that higher earners found Clinton’s less radical platform more reassuring - lost considerable support from those earning over $250,000 GEOGRAPHIC AREA While Clinton won a smaller share of the vote from those living in cities than Obama, she still led Trump by 24-points, while Trump led in rural areas by as even larger margin of 28-points. Trump’s success came largely from his support from rural areas and mid-sized counties with large numbers of blue-collar workers. Clinton won by hundreds of thousands of votes in counties like Wayne and Oakland, which have populations over 1 million, but she lost in virtually all of Michigan’s smallest counties, with populations from 150,000 to just 3,000.

Answer 11

POSITIONAL ISSUES The exit polls suggested that, as in most elections, the most salient issue in this election was the economy, followed by terrorism, immigration and foreign policy. Trump proposed very divisive policies for each of these salient issues e.g. promising to, deport millions of immigrants - we might expect to find that sizable majorities were in support of these positions. But the exit polls say that only 25% agree that illegal immigrants should be deported rather than offered legal status and a majority (54%) are opposed to Trump’s wall. While 47% believe that Obamacare ‘went too far’, 48% believe that it either did not go far enough or was just about right. Around 48% agreed with Clinton’s assertion that the country’s criminal justice system treats black citizens unfairly. These exit polls make it difficult to assert that Trump was elected because of broad support for his policy platform. 21% said considered the fact that the next president would make at least one Supreme Court appointment was the most important factor influencing their vote. Therefore, while many voters might not have agreed with Trump’s platform, they may have felt that their positions were much more likely to align with his choice of Supreme Court justice than Clinton’s likely choice. 60% of voters said the economy was the most important issue to them. In October 2012, unemployment dipped below 8% and the Democrats to say this was a sign of economy improvement. Obama’s campaign was helped by 53% of voters blaming Bush for the state of the economy. VALENCE ISSUES Many believed that it was unlikely that a candidate who had never held elected office before could beat someone with as much experience as Clinton. Many commentators’ confidence that Trump could not win only grew during the campaign, as he repeatedly made controversial statements that seemed likely to offend women, minorities, veterans, and the disabled. He was also beset by numerous scandals - for example, it was alleged that, due to a near $1 billion loss in 1992, Trump may have avoided paying taxes for nearly two decades. But the exit polls also suggested that many voters were either dissatisfied (46%) or angry (23%) with the federal government, and there was a strong ‘anti-establishment’ movement for change. The exit polls confirm that even many of Trump’s voters have an unfavourable view of him, considering him to be dishonest, untrustworthy and unqualified to be president. 39% said that they wanted a candidate who could deliver change, and of these voters, 82% voted for Trump. While voters had a slightly more favourable opinion of Clinton, and considered her more qualified, many considered her to be almost as untrustworthy as Trump. Throughout the campaign, Trump referred to Clinton as ‘Crooked Hillary’, and pointed to scandals that occurred during her time as Secretary of State as evidence that she was complicit in the Washington corruption that only he was prepared to clean up. INCUMBENCY/PAST PERFORMANCE Unless voters feel extremely positive about the economy and their current financial situation, it is always likely that a desire change will build over eight years. Only 31% felt their financial situation had improved over the last four years. Many voters (41%) argued that there had been little change, and 21% said that their situation had actually deteriorated. Only 36% said that the economy was in either good or excellent shape. While 53% approved of Obama as President, only 28% wanted the next president to continue his policies. Trump regularly argued that voting for Clinton would essentially be a vote for a third Obama term. CAMPAIGN Commentators noted how many volunteers Clinton had rallied and how many offices her campaign had opened, with thousands more paid staff to help get-out-the-vote (GOTV). They also wrote about how advanced the Clinton campaign’s databases were, enabling them to target voters with specific messages. Many derided the Trump campaign when it was revealed that it had spent more on ‘Make America Great Again’ hats than polling. However, it is arguable that while Democrats needed an organised ground game to mobilise voters who were not particularly enthused, Trump could rely on excited voters, who were already attending his large rallies, to vote without the need for such campaign infrastructure. By mid-October, the Trump campaign was reported to have spent around $238.9 million, while the Clinton campaign had spent $450.6 million. Over the course of the election, Trump realised that, with a single controversial tweet, he could dominate the news cycle and enthuse his base without spending a single dollar. Some have argued that, while the Clinton’s campaign rallied support from minority voters, it did not do enough to engage the white working-class males who ended up voting for Trump. As the polls led the Clinton campaign to remain confident in ‘Firewall’ states, it devoted more resources, made more visits, and spent far more on TV ads, in other swing states. However, as these Rust Belt states had experienced significant economic and industrial decline in recent decades, it has been argued that Trump’s anti-free trade platform was always likely to have a considerable impact. Clinton’s narrow defeats in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, cost her the election. OCTOBER SUPRISES Two of Trump’s most damning ‘October surprises’ were the October 1st revelation that he may not have paid income tax for over 20 years, and the October 7th release of a 2005 video of him making lewd comments about women, which was followed by several accusations of sexual assault. Clinton’s main October surprise surrounded her decision, while Secretary of State, to use a private email server, rather than an official State Department email account. Critics argued that this use of a private server violated State Department protocols and even federal laws and was irresponsible given the confidential nature of the emails being sent to her. At Trump rallies, mentions of the email server soon led to chants of ‘lock her up Just days before the election, Comey released a letter in which he said that an unrelated case had presented the FBI with a number of emails that “appear to be pertinent to the investigation” of Clinton. The FBI may have swayed the 14% of voters who claimed to make their mind up in the last week of the campaign.

Answer 12

TURNOUT Turnout of the VAP – 54.9% in 2012 and 55.7% in 2016. In the 2014 mid-terms, nationwide voter turnout was just 36.4%, the lowest since the 1942 elections. Undermines representative democracy as elected officials have a lesser mandate and less legitimacy. Arguably causes waste of some of the public money spent on elections (e.g. money spent on public financing of campaigns, polling stations and the counting of votes). Direct democracy turnout is also low. The 2012 recall election of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker had a turnout of 57.8%, similar to the turnout of the 2008 election. The results have a lesser mandate and less legitimacy, which is significant because the issues that are voted on can usually have a large impact on policy in a state. May lead to suggestions that it would be easier to simply let elected representatives make decisions. POLITICAL EFFICACY The US electoral systems have caused low levels of political efficacy, which means that voters are less likely to believe that they can have an effect on the political system. There are only six key swing states that can have an effect on the election results, so voters in safe states have little impact. In 2012, 7 of the top 10 turnout states were swing states. In the 2012 Presidential Election, 38 states were not visited a single time by the candidates because they were not swing states. In the 2012 Presidential Election, 37.12% of California’s electorate (4.8 million people) voted for Mitt Romney, but Obama won the state, therefore all electors went to Obama and 4.8 million votes for Romney were wasted because they didn’t help him win a single elector. $5.3 billion was spent in total on the 2008 elections. 50.8% of Congressmen were millionaires in 2013. Undermines pluralist democracy - unfair on those who have less impact on results. May result in negative feelings towards the government, leading to anarchist feelings. ACCESIBILITY Voting takes place on a Tuesday from 7am to 8pm, so many people could be at work or too busy to vote. Voter registration laws have prevented some citizens from voting. National Voter Registration Act (1993): required states to allow registration by mail and at other public agencies like driver’s licence offices or welfare agencies. Help America Vote Act (2002): required states to allow votes not on the register, but who believe they should be eligible, to cast a provisional ballot which could be checked after the election. Many states still have pre-election registration deadlines of 25-30 days prior to the election, which is usually the time that voters become most interested in the election. States offering same-day registration had on average 12% higher turnout in 2012. Shelby County v Holder (2013) undermined Congress’s power to approve state voter registration laws - within 24 hours of this decision, Texas and Mississippi had pledged to introduce new voter ID requirements, which would negatively affect poorer voters. Undermines pluralist democracy as it is easier for some people to vote than others. May promote elitism as it is harder for less wealthy and minority voters to register and turnout to vote. May result in the infringement of one of the most important human rights.

Answer 13

PARTISANSHIP The Democrats have 42.5 million registered voters, and the Republicans have 30.6 million. In the 2004, 2008 and 2012 presidential elections, 99% of all votes cast were for either the Democrat or Republican candidate. Historically, only 10% of voters have said that they are definitely independent. Shows that voters approve of the party they are aligned to, which should help to reduce negative opinions of politicians. Allow parties to educate their partisan voters, therefore voters are more aware of key issues, which is more democratic. Easier for less engaged voters because they can simply vote for their favoured party rather than have to be informed about specific candidates. NON-ELECTORAL PARTICIPATION The American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) has over 40 million members. It was estimated that a million people took part in the “Million Mom March” in 2000 in support of tighter gun regulations. A 2008 survey showed that in the last 12 months 32% of people asked had signed a petition and 30% had contacts a government official about an issue. Allows specific issues that aren’t directly covered by the two main parties in to be better represented, so helps to uphold pluralist democracy. Allows people to promote issues that they care about, so they may be more motivated to participate. Allows more grassroots participation, which may be seen as more democratic. DIRECT DEMOCRACY The 2012 “Colorado Amendment 64” initiative on marijuana had 68.55% turnout. The 2012 recall election of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker had a turnout of 57.8%. Direct democracy turnout is often higher than election turnout, for example turnout at Presidential elections was 57.1% in 2008 and 54.9% in 2012. The results have a greater mandate, so are more legitimate, and reduces apathy. In 2013, the Oregon state legislature passed Senate Bill 833, which made four-year driver licenses available to individuals without any legal documents to prove they were living in the US legally. Opposition groups soon gathered 71,000 signatures, enough to trigger a referendum, and in 2014, 66% of voters voted against the new law.

Answer 14

PARTISANSHIP A measure of how different definable groups within society turnout for elections. 89% of Democrats voted for Clinton and 90% of Republicans voted for Trump. In a political environment where different social groups align strongly with a particular party, and voters hold firmly unfavourable views of the opposition, differential turnout/abstention becomes much more important. As parties feel more confident in predicting how people will vote, they have become more concerned with influencing who will be motivated to cast a ballot. Some have argued that, in 2016, Trump did a particularly good job of appealing to white working-class voters, who normally vote for Democratic candidates Fewer voters were also willing to split their ticket than in 2012, i.e. to vote for a president and House Representative from different parties. This is likely because the Democratic and Republican parties have polarised greatly in recent decades, and now offer voters very different positions on economic issues, like public spending, healthcare and taxation, and social issues, like gay marriage, gun rights, and abortion. In the 2016 exit polls, 31% of voters identified as ‘independent’, but those who identify as independents today are actually more consistent in their support for a particular party than voters who said that they were “strong partisans” in the 1970s. One difference between strongly aligned independents and ‘weak partisans’ is that independent voters are more likely to stay at home on Election Day. SWING STATES The fact that Clinton won the popular vote by over 2.6 million votes might give the appearance that the Democrats did a better job of encouraging their base to vote than the Republican Party. However, this overlooks the fact that, nationally, Clinton received 396,318 fewer votes than Obama in 2012, and many of these lost votes were in crucial swing states, like Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Iowa, and Ohio, which all voted for Obama in 2012, but Trump in 2016 - in these five Rust Belt states Clinton received over 1.2 million fewer votes than Obama won in 2012. Rather than support the Republican candidate, many Democrats who were unwilling to vote for Clinton appear to have instead voted for third party candidates like Gary Johnson and Jill Stein, who between them saw an increase in support almost as strong as Trump’s. And, as turnout was down in Wisconsin, Ohio, Iowa and Michigan, it also appears that many other Democrats stayed at home. For example, in Ohio, Trump won almost 180,000 more votes than Romney, while third party candidates collectively received almost 170,000 more votes than in 2012. In Wisconsin, Trump received 3,966 fewer votes than Romney in 2012, but, as Clinton lost almost 240,000 votes, Obama’s sizable lead there vanished. Third party candidates benefited from this lack of enthusiasm for the two main candidates, collectively winning over 150,000 more votes in Wisconsin. However, this still meant that around 93,000 people, many of whom likely voted for Obama in 2012, stayed at home. With so many voters either abstaining or casting, what were arguably, protest votes for third party candidates, it becomes harder to argue that Trump won solely through his appeal to traditional Democrats. MID-TERMS Turnout is much lower at mid-terms. In the 2014 mid-terms, nationwide voter turnout was just 36.4%, the lowest since the 1942 elections. 80 million people voted in 2010 compared to 130 million in 2008. Minorities and youth voters are less likely to turnout at mid-terms. The youth vote dropped from 18% of the 2008 electorate to 12% of the 2010 electorate. The over 65 vote increased from 15% of the 2008 electorate to 21% of the 2010 electorate. The Tea Party were able to make gains in the 2010 midterms due to the higher turnout of old and white voters compared to younger minority voters. Minorities and youth voters being less likely to turnout at mid-terms is significant because it greatly benefits the Republicans, as shown by the gains they made in the 2010 mid-terms and the 2014 mid-terms. GET OUT THE VOTE (GOTV) Obama’s 2012 “Project Narwhal” enabled targeted advertising to be sent to specific demographics in order to increase turnout from Obama’s key demographics. The project also encouraged people to spread viral messages about the campaign and claimed that 1 in 5 people contacted by a Facebook friend went on to register. Clinton rallied many volunteers, and her campaign opened many offices, with thousands more paid staff to help GOTV. They also wrote about how advanced the Clinton campaign’s databases were, enabling them to target voters with specific messages. GOTV drives are significant because they can engage apathetic voters with politics, therefore help to educate the electorate and reinforce democratic principles. VOTER DEMOGRAPHICS Larger voter demographics may be more motivated to turnout to vote because they can have a greater impact on the election result. Whites made up 79.2% of the electorate in 1996, but only 71.1% in 2012, which may have influenced the decrease in white turnout. African Americans made up 11.9% of the electorate in 1996, but 12.5% in 2012, which may have influenced the increase in African American turnout. It has been estimated that Hispanic people will become the largest ethnic group in Texas within the next decade, meaning the Democrats could potentially win in Texas, which is currently a Republican safe state. The Democrats’ “Battleground Texas” is working to register many Hispanic and other disengaged voters in Texas. Changing voter demographics impacting on differential turnout is significant because it may be seen as similar to gerrymandering as the success of a party can depend on where their voters are living, therefore this could reduce the mandate and legitimacy of the election results.

Answer 15

PARTISANSHIP A measure of how different definable groups within society turnout for elections. 89% of Democrats voted for Clinton and 90% of Republicans voted for Trump. In a political environment where different social groups align strongly with a particular party, and voters hold firmly unfavourable views of the opposition, differential turnout/abstention becomes much more important. As parties feel more confident in predicting how people will vote, they have become more concerned with influencing who will be motivated to cast a ballot. Some have argued that, in 2016, Trump did a particularly good job of appealing to white working-class voters, who normally vote for Democratic candidates Fewer voters were also willing to split their ticket than in 2012, i.e. to vote for a president and House Representative from different parties. This is likely because the Democratic and Republican parties have polarised greatly in recent decades, and now offer voters very different positions on economic issues, like public spending, healthcare and taxation, and social issues, like gay marriage, gun rights, and abortion. In the 2016 exit polls, 31% of voters identified as ‘independent’, but those who identify as independents today are actually more consistent in their support for a particular party than voters who said that they were “strong partisans” in the 1970s. One difference between strongly aligned independents and ‘weak partisans’ is that independent voters are more likely to stay at home on Election Day. SWING STATES The fact that Clinton won the popular vote by over 2.6 million votes might give the appearance that the Democrats did a better job of encouraging their base to vote than the Republican Party. However, this overlooks the fact that, nationally, Clinton received 396,318 fewer votes than Obama in 2012, and many of these lost votes were in crucial swing states, like Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Iowa, and Ohio, which all voted for Obama in 2012, but Trump in 2016 - in these five Rust Belt states Clinton received over 1.2 million fewer votes than Obama won in 2012. Rather than support the Republican candidate, many Democrats who were unwilling to vote for Clinton appear to have instead voted for third party candidates like Gary Johnson and Jill Stein, who between them saw an increase in support almost as strong as Trump’s. And, as turnout was down in Wisconsin, Ohio, Iowa and Michigan, it also appears that many other Democrats stayed at home. For example, in Ohio, Trump won almost 180,000 more votes than Romney, while third party candidates collectively received almost 170,000 more votes than in 2012. In Wisconsin, Trump received 3,966 fewer votes than Romney in 2012, but, as Clinton lost almost 240,000 votes, Obama’s sizable lead there vanished. Third party candidates benefited from this lack of enthusiasm for the two main candidates, collectively winning over 150,000 more votes in Wisconsin. However, this still meant that around 93,000 people, many of whom likely voted for Obama in 2012, stayed at home. With so many voters either abstaining or casting, what were arguably, protest votes for third party candidates, it becomes harder to argue that Trump won solely through his appeal to traditional Democrats. MID-TERMS Turnout is much lower at mid-terms. In the 2014 mid-terms, nationwide voter turnout was just 36.4%, the lowest since the 1942 elections. 80 million people voted in 2010 compared to 130 million in 2008. Minorities and youth voters are less likely to turnout at mid-terms. The youth vote dropped from 18% of the 2008 electorate to 12% of the 2010 electorate. The over 65 vote increased from 15% of the 2008 electorate to 21% of the 2010 electorate. The Tea Party were able to make gains in the 2010 midterms due to the higher turnout of old and white voters compared to younger minority voters. Minorities and youth voters being less likely to turnout at mid-terms is significant because it greatly benefits the Republicans, as shown by the gains they made in the 2010 mid-terms and the 2014 mid-terms. GET OUT THE VOTE (GOTV) Obama’s 2012 “Project Narwhal” enabled targeted advertising to be sent to specific demographics in order to increase turnout from Obama’s key demographics. The project also encouraged people to spread viral messages about the campaign and claimed that 1 in 5 people contacted by a Facebook friend went on to register. Clinton rallied many volunteers, and her campaign opened many offices, with thousands more paid staff to help GOTV. They also wrote about how advanced the Clinton campaign’s databases were, enabling them to target voters with specific messages. GOTV drives are significant because they can engage apathetic voters with politics, therefore help to educate the electorate and reinforce democratic principles. VOTER DEMOGRAPHICS Larger voter demographics may be more motivated to turnout to vote because they can have a greater impact on the election result. Whites made up 79.2% of the electorate in 1996, but only 71.1% in 2012, which may have influenced the decrease in white turnout. African Americans made up 11.9% of the electorate in 1996, but 12.5% in 2012, which may have influenced the increase in African American turnout. It has been estimated that Hispanic people will become the largest ethnic group in Texas within the next decade, meaning the Democrats could potentially win in Texas, which is currently a Republican safe state. The Democrats’ “Battleground Texas” is working to register many Hispanic and other disengaged voters in Texas. Changing voter demographics impacting on differential turnout is significant because it may be seen as similar to gerrymandering as the success of a party can depend on where their voters are living, therefore this could reduce the mandate and legitimacy of the election results.

Essay plans - Electoral systems Flashcards

(39 cards)