Midterm Elections : Midterm Election

Beginning with a contextualization of America surrounding the 2004 presidential election. This was the first election since the 9-11 attacks and the beginning of the war on terror. Many Americans uneasy, and the state of the nation was unstable. With this fear and instability,

     I will now examine some of last election year’s results. Voter turnout has decreased in the past years. There are two main factors that have been coming up in the past years. First, many citizens say that who is elected in office is not as important as it once was. Secondly, younger Americans are more cynical and disconnected from politics than ever. I think there is too much information out there and another thing that might be the reason this is happening is

When George Washington was elected President in 1789 by members of the fledgling United States of America, he was setting into motion a tradition that has stood the test of over 225 years - the presidential election. Even as the United States has seen dozens of wars, made hundreds of scientific advances, and selected thousands of politicians to seats everywhere from small town councils to Congress, the principles of the election have remained the same; the people band together to determine who will best protect their interests at home and assure that the US will always remain on top in foreign policy. Oftentimes, this is found to be a difficult decision, as public opinion is constantly wavering. One sees this in action particularly during the 1992 election - a battle of wills between Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush, and Ross Perot; complete with lead changes, major vote swings, and Perot’s unprecedented initial success - ultimately a false alarm to the bipartisan establishment.

The 1980 presidential election of the United States featured three primary candidates, Republican Ronald Reagan, Democrat Jimmy Carter and liberal Republican John Anderson. Ronald Reagan was the governor of California before he decided to run for the presidency. John Anderson was a representative in Illinois and Carter was the incumbent. The lengthy Iran hostage crisis sharpened public opinions by the beginning of the election season. In the 1970s, the United States were experiencing a straining episode of low economic growth, high price increases and interest rates and an irregular energy crisis. The sense of discomfort in both domestic and foreign affairs in the nation were heading downward, this added to the downward spiral that was already going on. Between Carter, Anderson and Reagan, the general election campaign of the 1980s seemed more concerned with shadowboxing around political issues rather than a serious discussion of the issues that concerned voters.

Presidential Leadership and the Electoral College. Americans expect their presidents to get things done, to

In 2012 President Obama spoke to a group of people at a fund raiser event in Texas and seemed optimistic that Texas would soon be a battleground for the Democratic Party (Parker, 2013). Unless Democrats possess an extraordinary strategic plan this could prove to be a challenging task to accomplish. Recent voting in Texas has faithfully been favorable toward the Republican ticket for over 30 years (Parker, 2013). There has been a widespread margin in the percentage of votes between Republican and Democratic candidates in the last four presidential elections. Currently Republicans occupy all elected statewide offices, both state

The midterm elections in Texas were something very big this year. This year was the year that the current governor, Rick Perry, would not seek a fourth term. Greg Abbott, real name, Gregory Wayne Abbott, won the midterm election for governor and will take office in January 20, 2015.

The Coattail effect is the tendency for a popular political party leader to attract votes for other candidates of the same party in an election and the reverse coattails effect is the opposite. The popularity of the president or lack of popularity can prove detrimental to incumbents for example in 1992 Bill Clintons Democrats actually lost 9 seats in the House of Representatives and the lack excitement of the campaign can be linked to performance in the House and Senate. In June 2010 only 32% of voters felt that most members of Congress deserved re-election. Even among Democratic respondents only 53% felt that most members deserved re-election. In addition unanticipated world events such as the Global Financial Crisis which was considered by many economists to have been the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s resulted in declining support for George W bush and the collapse of Lehman Brothers added to the weakening support for George Bush. Many thought the actions of George Bush reflected the incumbent senators and congressman. Although the president could work in the incumbents favour for example when 9/11 occurred George Bush announced his War on terror this led to considerable support for Bush leading to a large proportion of incumbent Republican getting re-elected. A Gallup poll conducted in 2014 found that 52% of registered voters planned on voting not

Although Burr was never able to reach 50% in the polls, he exceeded that threshold on Election Day and defeated Ross by almost 6%. In order to analyze the political climate further, I will be comparing the exit polls for both Trump vs. Clinton and Burr vs Ross. This will help explain why Ross was entering the Senate race with a disadvantage despite media pundits arguing that higher turnout in presidential election years should benefit Ross. Although Five Thirty Eight gave Clinton the slight edge to defeat Trump in North Carolina, Trump’s was able to carry the state with a modest performance. Although Real Clear Politics had Burr winning by an average of 2%, that was certainly below the 5.7% final result. In a three way race between Trump, Clinton, and Johnson, Trump was predicted to win North Carolina by about 1%. The actual results, however, showed Trump winning by about 4%. Although this paper is focusing on the Senate race, it’s certainly important to note the impact that a presidential candidate can have on the electoral map, particularly

When the words “swing state” are mentioned, Florida is perhaps one of the first states a person may think of. In this year’s election cycle, the story is no different. Florida has a single senate seat up for election, and Marco Rubio (R), and Patrick Murphy (D) are hoping to claim it on November 8th. Marco Rubio has held that seat since the last senate election in 2010, giving him an edge as the incumbent. Patrick Murphy is the challenger and has been a member of the House of Representatives since 2012. A glance at any polling numbers shows Rubio ahead, and most have shown him ahead since the beginning of the race. The polls do not show a commanding lead, as one may expect from an incumbent. While polling margins are slimmer than many average incumbents, money has not stopped flowing to Rubio. His finances are typical of an incumbent particularly that of a closely contested race. It may be impossible to tell which has the greater effect of Rubio’s fundraising. In states that are typically swing states and have close political races, simple analyses such as incumbency advantage may not fully explain the results and polls in the race.

There is a large amount of enthusiasm surrounding the election of a new commander in chief in the first couple months. During the first couple years, that same enthusiasm and momentum is alive. In their third and fourth year, all of the president’s supporters are eager to re-elect him. However, in their fifth and sixth years, presidencies tend to run out of gas, new ideas, and their previous agenda has dried up. As a result, not only do presidents have to come up with a new agenda, the nation also commences to steadily and progressively grow fatigued, resulting in bad six-year itches and usually unsuccessful efforts to transfer possession of the White House to the vice president or some other member of the

Amidst the past eight years of lackluster economic advancement, America’s prowess and respect declining worldwide, increasing government involvement in daily lives, and a President seemingly unwilling to take a solid stance on a the global threat of terrorism, the transfer of power between political parties in the White House is not so stunning. Due to the two-party system, this is not an unprecedented phenomenon. The American people are constantly seeking a political party to garner their attention and adapt to changing times, opinions, demographics, and attitudes (Cohen) and this results in the alternation of power between the two key political parties.

The article, “How Presidents Shape Their Party’s Reputation and Prospects: New Evidence,” explains previous presidents and their popularity. There are five main questions that are stated regarding presidents’ popularity. Gary Jacobson, the author of this article, explains where he acquires his statistical research and his use of it throughout the article. Regarding the previous statements, there is a detailed description about the results that are found from the research. By the end of this review, the reader understands my overall opinion on this article. With this being said, what is the question the author hopes to answers, what method does the author use to answer the question, what is the answers found, and my thoughts on the article

The two major political parties, organizations made up of those seeking control of Government offices through elections, often clash due to each party’s different political ideology, its views and opinions of public policy. Despite Hillary Clinton’s best efforts to appeal to all Americans, in which she did accomplished with the popular vote, Donald Trump had won the Presidency through the Electoral College, an American institution that cast votes for the United States President that are usually representative of a state’s overall vote. Clinton lost consistently blue states such as Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, indicating a shift with both liberal and moderate party identification, how an individual’s is loyalty to or identifies with a political party. This election serves as a perfect example of the Rational Choice Theory, a theory used frequently in political science to explain how an individual votes based on their own best interest. In the case of this election, Donald Trump won the presidency as his party platform focused primarily on economic stimulation which appealed most Americans interests, unlike Clinton’s whose objectives and principles as President were focused on cultural issues. The Democratic party can come back from this election if it decides to recognize the public interest of the people to rebuild the economy and not ignore the working

The American Presidency is undoubtedly one of the most widely recognized popular icons throughout the world. Although to most foreigners or those who have never resided in the United States or know little of its history, the executive branch of government may seem to be as dull and unyielding as the rest of the American politics, for those few rare individuals who have taken the time to examine and closely scrutinize this office of the American political system and its recent history, quite the opposite will be said. Unlike Congressional or local elections where typically a number of individuals of the same ideological background must be elected in order for a particular issue to be