U.s. Presidential Election Elections Essay

The author, V. O. Key, states the results of a survey that shows that voters tend to vote for people who vote for candidates that will help them financially. He also states that people tend to vote for a certain party’s candidate because of their ties to the party. Key then declares that one can predict a person’s vote based on their personality and attributes. Key also shows that although these behaviors show strangeness, the voters have great importance to politics. Key says that the voters’ behavior has importance as it helps candidates discover the nature of the voters’ interests to try gain an advantage. Finally, Key states that voters behave as well as possible, considering the possibilities of other

In the article “The Myth of the Vanishing Voter” by Michael P. McDonald and Samuel L. Popkin, it is argued that the decline in voter participation in national elections since 1972 is an illusion created by the Bureau of the Census because it uses the voting-age population to calculate voter turnout instead of calculating the population of citizens who are eligible to vote (2001, 963).

Unlike parties in many other countries, political parties in the U.S. are relatively weak in terms of their ability to mobilize voters to register and ultimately vote on election- day. This inability to mobilize voters has direct correlation to the fact that membership and affiliation in political

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

As society rapidly changes with an influx of new ideas and issues, studying the college educated and those who are not will help evaluate behaviors and attitudes towards the government, ultimately, clearing the way to adaption into a modern society that perhaps offer remedies of educational and voting discrepancies or even close the gaps between political ideology or identification. Hence, this paper proposes the research question: How does education level influence political party identification.

The US Presidential Election of 2000 featured George W. Bush and Al Gore. It will go down in history as one of the most closest elections¡¦ in US history. It also goes down as one of the most controversial. The final decision was based on just a few hundred votes in Florida. The controversy began when the media prematurely declared the winner twice based solely on exit polls. They finally conceded that the Florida count was just too close to predict. It would take a month before the election was ultimately certified after numerous court challenges and vote recounts. Republican candidate George W. Bush was declared the winner of the Florida¡¦s 25 electoral votes. This was a victory by a razor thin margin of popular

The Survey Research Center of the University of Michigan noted self-proclaimed independents made up 19% of voters in 1958, to just below 40% for the past decade. Dealignment also results from divisive, sometimes nonpartisan societal issues. After the election of 1968, there was widespread debate over race relations and the Vietnam War that eventually lessened democratic control; yet, the number of independents grew more than the number of republicans in the 1970s and 80s. Population growth is also an explanation for this trend; when communities were tight-knit, it was important to have a partisan affiliation in order to be accepted and contributing in the community. With a larger and more distant population, people consider partisan affiliation a threat to individuality, and choose to vote for the best politician, not the party. Another reason for the dealignment of political parties is the rise of interest groups that are better equipped to take positions on specific and divisive policy issues than are political

In a political atmosphere where it is easy to be grouped up in either conservative or liberal, it is harder to see such an easy split more and more each day. Non-traditional candidates are now emerging into the political arena that in prior elections would have been scoffed at. Whether we are talking about the unusually high polling Libertarian candidate, Gary Johnson, the Democratic Socialist Bernie Sanders or the Authoritarian Republican Nominee, Donald Trump, It is getting harder and harder to ignore the rise they are having. The two major political parties will have to adapt to these emerging ideologies or face the threat of the dreaded “third party”.

One area for future analysis is the role of independents in the post-World War II shift in partisanship. We have for decades assumed that independents were either closeted partisans or that they were apathetic nonvoters (Dalton 2013). Recent research has suggested that there has been a shift in the structure of independent voters. There are the independents that fit the mold of how we traditionally saw independents called apoliticals. These independents have little knowledge about politics, don’t see politics as mattering to them, and are less likely to participate in politics by voting, giving money, or volunteering with a campaign than other members of the electorate. There has been a steady growth nationally since the 1950s in apartisans.

America is vastly known as a country boundlessly pursuing equality in all facets of life. In this seemingly endless quest for equal opportunity, there has been one lurking negation; our election system. The addition to equal representation in public funding and on the ballot will create variability and allow Americans to entrust their vote in a political format that more closely aligns with democratic philosophy. Therefore, a shift away from a bipartisan, a two party, dominated election system would not only be a healthy change for American electoral satisfaction, but for the future of third party politics. Unfortunately affluence and inherent wealth have played a large role in this divide between a true democratic election and our present biased, broken, and benyne system.

Data used for this term paper was obtained from Houghton Mifflin Company through the 1996 Voter's Data Set found as part of the Crosstabs package. The dependent variable (rows) I chose to highlight the 1996 U.S. presidential election voting pattern was the Final Voting Choice. The independent variables (columns) I chose were personal traits such as education, income, age, religious affiliations, race, and gender. The data made available by the Crosstabs program was compiled in a statistically scientific way by a national survey of citizens before and after the 1996 election. The objective of this research is to determine which of the personal traits of the electorate has a positive, negative, or an indifferent impact on voter turnout. Therefore, I have made the following five assertions in the below listed hypotheses:

Obstacles to voting and the absent voting of pure independents are the reason of low turnout in the U.S. today, which may also have great influence both politically and legally. The voter turnout is the percentage of qualified voters who actually go to an election to cast a ballot. Overall, the voter turnout in America is low, with only between 51 and 57 percent of eligible voters going to polls in presidential elections from 2004 to 2012. The reason why America has such a low turnout is because of several obstacles in voting. The U.S. do not provide paid holiday for voters who are workers to vote or well-structured politics for different racial voters, other obstacles like advanced registration and absentee voting also make the voting more difficult for voters. The pure independents, who are unlike independent leaners or behaviour independents, are less well informed and less care about the election information and also definitely less likely to vote on the Election Day, they do not have any preference for any candidates or parties. As Hershey mentioned in his book,

The United States was built on the basis that individuals have freedoms that cannot be taken from them. Over the course of the country’s nearly 250-year history, those freedoms have helped shape a political system that encourages independent actions amid a lack of hierarchical constraints. That isn’t to say that there is no authority within the U.S. government, but rather it marks a uniquely undisciplined structure for the country’s two-party system. The current Democratic and Republican system is undisciplined because the parties do not consist of individuals – both politicians and citizens – who always line up directly with the larger organization. Intentional parameters in elections and representation were put in place to allow for this, but unintended developments have also perpetuated the individual autonomy present in the current party system. Both factors contribute to today’s political scene, but the country’s foundation in individual freedoms and a person-over-party system is the biggest reason for the parties’ lack of discipline, while other causes like geography and technology simply fuel the system without creating the undisciplined party system by themselves.

Many political science researchers study the forces that drive the vote. One of the earliest, and most well known, books about election studies is The American Voter. Written in 1960, the book tries to explain a model that describes what drives Americans to vote the way they do. The model suggests that social factors determine ones party identification, which determines one's issue positions and evaluation of candidate's characteristics. These forces all work together to determine how one will vote. This model may or may not still hold true today, as political researchers are not in agreement as to what exactly drives the vote. One thing that does remain true, however, is that factors such as social groups, party identification, issues,

There are various factors that influence how a voter will cast their choice in the U.S. elections. Party identification is the most top factor in a person's voting choice. Some voters are members of either the two majors political parties; the Democratic Party or the Republican Party. These party affiliations are usually determined by a person's influences from family, peers, media and the assessment of the candidates and the issues. Independents who are not affiliated with either party does not have a particular loyalty to any party. They vote mainly on the issues (Schmidt, Shelley, Bardes, 2011, p.193).