The Presidential Election Has Never Like An Eternity, The Embarrassment Of American Politics

In 1854, the Republican Party was established as a response to controversial issues within the United States of America. The founders of this political party ‒ anti-slavery Whigs, former Democrats, former members of the Free Soil Party and Know-Nothing Party ‒ helped to identify their ideals prior to the Civil War.

Since America’s early founding in 1776 we have been a country of wide ranging political views. Our first two political parties were the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist. These two parties changed how people think about government issues, political opinions, and the topics that drove the growth of our nation. Federalist and Anti-Federalist split the nation with beliefs, important politicians, and support from the people.

The first topic that needs to be addressed is Voter ID laws. What voter ID laws are, is they are laws that basically state that a person is required to give some form of photo identification before they are able to register to vote or receive a ballot for an election. The states that are strict about photo identification is Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi,

The First political parties of the United States were called the Federalists and the Democratic Republicans. These parties were formed in the 1970’s, and although they had no formal national organization, like the later parties eventually would, they had very strong beliefs. The two parties were caused by the debates of the U.S. bank, the balance of state and national powers, and much more. They had opposing views on pretty much everything, such as the government strength, the interpretation of the constitution, etc. The original political parties in America differed in their views of alliances with either the French or the British.

In order to participate in major elections, third parties must first overcome a myriad of obstacles that have been put in place by both the founding fathers and politicians of our current two-party system. Rosenstone and his colleagues contend that the most important barrier in place to discourage the success of third parties is the plurality single-member districts that are the cornerstone of the American electoral process. Not only do single-member districts elect only one member to higher office, but they also allow such elections to occur without an electoral majority. If voters know that a third party is unlikely to receive a substantial amount of votes, they may believe a vote for the party would be a wasted vote. This requirement for a plurality of votes is especially detrimental for a third party presidential campaign, due to the fact that the Electoral College distributes electoral votes to the winner of each statewide vote (excluding Nebraska and Maine), and the only plausible way for a third party candidate to receive any electoral votes is to be extremely popular in a certain region of the United States. Unlike the two major

“The Republican Party was founded in 1854 by a group of renegade Democrats, Whigs, and political independents who opposed the expansion of Slavery into new U.S. territories and states. What began as a single-issue, independent party became a major political force in the United States. Six years after the new party was formed, Republican nominee Abraham Lincoln won the U.S. presidential election. The Republican Party and its counterpart, the Democratic Party, became the mainstays of the nation's de facto two-party system.” As stated in the free dictionary’s definition of the republican party. The Republican and Democrat parties are opposites on almost every decision they come to. The Republican party is more small government whereas the Democratic party is pro big government.

The two main political parties in the U.S. are the Democratic Party founded by Andrew Jackson and Republican Party founded by anti slavery activist in the northern states. Both of these parties have different views and are the only ones used in the American government since 1952. The electoral

The United States has maintained its two party system for some time, but the major parties have not always been so clearly separated. In the early and mid-twentieth century, polarization was actually declining, as there was much ideological overlap between the members of the two parties (Kuo). Many people, such as conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans, rested in the ideological middle. Additionally, each party represented a coalition of diverse interests. At

In America today there are many political parties which include the Democrats and the Republicans. The beginning of political parties started in 1787 with the federalist, then later on the anti-federalist in 1796. Alexander Hamilton was the leader of the federalist party. Thomas Jefferson was the leader of the anti-federalist; who called themselves the Democratic-Republicans. Our first president, George Washington warned us about having parties and the danger of them. However, "not until Congress debated the ratification and implementation of Jay’s Treaty with Great Britain did two political parties clearly emerge"; the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist. Today the most influential parties are the Democrats and the Republicans. These parties win all of the presidential elections as of today. Political parties formed because the United States was beginning to grow and expand. Many people had different opinions and so political parties were formed. People were concerned about the how the new government was going to be organized.

First, the two-party system does not create an equal policy in society because it does not allow people to get far if they are not within either of the two parties. The idea of the winner-take-all electoral system is the hostile terrain for third parties because the odds are in favor of the bigger parties (Conray). The bigger parties over the years seem to have the upper hand within the government, and especially within the elections.

           The U.S. electoral system was created to give every citizen a say in who their elected officials should be, but this system has failed miserably. The right to vote is a basic right that needs be provided to every American regardless of such traits as political party, religion, or ethnicity. It is unethical to deny a person the right to vote and historically that has been a major problem in the United States. Our election system is completely corrupt and voter rights is not the only problem, strategically drawing voting districts is also a major issue. Our current electoral system is corrupt and unethical because of gerrymandering, the breaking down of the voter rights act, and voter ID laws.

The winner take all system states that the candidate who gets the most votes (or a majority) more than any other candidate wins all of a state’s votes. Despite the system having its own advantages, it still leaves some difficult decisions that candidates have to face such as allocating what resources to use or focusing on not only competitive states, but swing states and large states where candidates will spend most of their time or their money and attempt to attract the media. This winner take-all system takes an enormous toll on third party candidates. While third parties can attract popular votes, it is extremely difficult for them to attract any electoral votes because they have a very slight to no chance of winning a state. Because they can’t win many electoral votes, it takes a large toll on their ability to raise funds and gain other campaign resources. While the Electoral College has been beneficial in many ways, there are some citizens who believe that it should be abolished. That actually is not such a good idea and there are many reasons why. One is that it would require an additional constitutional amendment and it would take the majority of the states to pass it. As most to all of the states favor a two-party system, the chances of abolishing the Electoral College are slim to none. Another reason would be that competitive states appreciate the Electoral College. While states such as California and Texas already have their minds set, states such as Ohio and Iowa favor the system because in the past and present, their vote has gone on to help elect a candidate into

Since the administration of George Washington two political parties have dominated the United States political system, but they have not always been the same two parties. The first two parties were the Federalists and Anti-Federalists. Federalists were those who supported a strong federal government and the Anti-Federalists were those who did not. The leaders of the Federalists were Alexander Hamilton and John Adams. Both were from the Northeast where the Federalist line of thinking was strongest. Thomas Jefferson became the leader of the Anti-Federalists. These two groups really did not considered themselves parties. The founders feared parties because they thought of them as factions.

Winner-take-all systems tend to be significantly simpler and more stable. However, the representatives in this system tend to be more polarized than the average voter in the districts they represent. Additionally, winner-take-all systems tend to keep a very small number of parties in play, limiting the voters’ perceived reasonable choices. As pointed out earlier, the majority vote does not even need to be a majority of the total. A candidate only needs more votes than any of the other candidates to win, which may not be representative of the electorate. In a system with two major parties, one of the worst-case scenarios could be an election where the winner only has about 45 percent of the total votes. This would mean that around 55 percent of the district’s population is not being properly represented. Minor parties are often looked at as hopeless non-options, since they appear to be lacking the support necessary to win. Voters do not want to waste their votes, so they will try to make what they believe to be the best decision between two highly polarized parties. It is like trying to draw a rainbow in black and white—possible, difficult, yet not likely to produce an accurate depiction. While this makes the system significantly simpler for voters, it also makes the system more easily corruptible, and almost certain to produce a less accurate representation of public interests. Part of the appeal for the argument of keeping this system is that doing so

Election rules in favor of Democrats and Republicans, not minorities. Minor parties must have a min. number of votes to appear on ballot. Various things must appear for minor parties to get on the ballot: num. Of signatures, allotted time to collect; signatures distributed across several counties. (Maglebey 56)