Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The United States electoral system
The United States electoral system
Essay on electoral college explained
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The disputed election of 1876 was one of the most controversial Presidential elections in United States history. This election began as many others when Republican candidate Rutherford B. Hayes a three- time governor from Ohio faced off against Democratic candidate and reform governor of New York Samuel J. Tilden. At the start of the election, it appeared that Tilden would sweep the majority of the popular and electoral votes as he had nearly 300,000 more popular votes and earn 184 out of the 369 electoral votes. (Brinkley 369) Towards the end of the voting process, it was made apparent that there were 20 disputed electoral votes that came from Florida, Oregon, Louisiana, and South Carolina and if Hayes won all 20 electoral votes, he would win the Presidency. These disputed votes …show more content…
As expected, the commission members stayed loyal to their parties and voted along party lines. Since there was now one more Republican then Democrats, the election went to Republican candidate Rutherford B. Hayes. (Brinkley 370) In order to make this election fair, Congress should have re-selected the members of the commission to include an independent from either the House of Representatives, Senate, or the Supreme Court and have an equal number of Republicans and Democrats. Therefore, if the members vote along party lines, as seen in this case, their would be an unbiased decision made by the independent member could be used to break the gridlock. If this were the case in the disputed election of 1876, than both candidates would have had a more equal opportunity for victory. After the election, unsavory behaviors continued. As tension rose between the parties and a Democratic filibuster could intentionally obstruct the electoral commissions report, leader from both parties met in secret to settle on a
Despite the overwhelming critics, Texas remains one of several states that keep supporting the concept of partisan judicial elections, where voters cast a straight-ticket vote. In fact, electing judges by the public leads to a number of ethical problems which necessarily require compromise between judicial integrity and independence. Most of the allegations of wrong-doing have caused a number of professional and citizen groups to become disaffected with the existing system.
... of Florida, under the Electoral College, electoral votes for the candidate running for office receive a plurality of their popular vote. Therefore, whoever gets the majority of the national electoral votes wins the election. Bush won by a narrow margin of these votes resulting in a mandatory machine recount, which afterwards concluded that Bush’s victory margin, was even narrower. This allowed Al Gore to request a recount in the counties of his choice, so naturally he chose the counties whose votes were historically democratic. The uncertainty continued through the circuit courts all the way to The Florida Supreme Court who ruled in Bush v. Gore that there was not enough time to recount the popular vote ballots without violating the United States constitution. The recounting of the ballots would have violated the Fourteenth Amendments “Equal Protection Clause”.
These parties were the federalists and the republicans. They had very few geographical divisions, and views were mixed on both sides. See the best example of this in the Maysville Road article. There was a dispute over the proposed road, and whether or not it should be built. federal money.
From 1860 to 1877, the American people faced several constitutional and social issues. For example, the after-effects of the Civil War, power struggle between the state and federal government, issues with civil liberties and suffrage, the rights of free black men, and resentment of white men, have all become critical issues. These critical issues needed immediate resolutions. Therefore, resolutions were created to solve these problems and those resolutions called for new constitutional and social developments that have amount to a revolution.
In the year of 1824, tempers were flaring and insults were being exchanged as politicians argued over who would be the sixth president of the United States. John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson were the two major candidates in the election. However, this would be an election that would be remembered in history for its unique result. Despite being the more popular candidate, Andrew Jackson would not become the president. The presidential election of 1824 is remembered as one of the most controversial elections to have ever occurred in the history of the United States.
How did the election of Lincoln to president in 1860 lead to civil war in the United States of America?
In addition, all four candidates running for the title of President, Debs, Roosevelt, Wilson, and Taft, were all progressives, and wanted to reduce the number of trusts. This gave all voters, men or women, no incentive to vote. At the end of the election, Woodrow Wilson won, with 435 electoral votes, while Roosevelt had 88, and Taft received a mere eight.... ... middle of paper ... ...
“The United States emerged from a virulent, intense, and inhumane civil war and evolved into a new nation during this period. This transition was the culmination of political, economic, social, and cultural movements which transformed the nation. E Pluribus Unum - out of many United States, one nation; the United States was forged in the cauldron of these revolutions." -Arnold Toynbee, A Study of History
Florida with 25 electoral votes did not have an official winner because the result was inside the margin of error for machine counting. Gore knew the only way to figure this out was to have a manual recount of several counties ballots. As Palm Beach County was recounting its ballots, Florida Secretary Harris, a Republican and co-chair of the Florida Bush campaign, officially certified the election for Bush. In reaction to this decision, Gore and Palm Beach filed suit against Bush and Harris in Florida Supreme Court demanding that the recount should go on. On November 22, Bush appealed to the United States Supreme Court against Palm Beach County Canvassing Board stating the decision was in violation of a federal statute requiring electors to be finished at a given point before the Electoral College met.
During the election of 1800, Thomas Jefferson succeeded in defeating the incumbent, John Adams, and assumed the presidency. In terms of elections though, the election of 1800 itself was a fascinating election in that it a heavily-contested election and was effectively the first time political parties ran smear campaigns against each other during an election. The Republican Party attacked the Federalists for being anti-liberty and monarchist and tried to persuade the public that the Federalists were abusing their power through acts such as the Alien & Sedition Acts and the suppression of the Whiskey Rebellion (Tindall and Shi 315). The Federalists, on the other hand, attacked Jefferson for his atheism and support of the French Revolution and warned that his election would result in chaos (316). By the end of the presidential election, neither Adams nor Jefferson emerged with his reputation completely intact. Still, rather than an election between Adams and Jefferson, the election of 1800 ultimately boiled down to a deadlock between Jefferson and his vice presidential candidate, Aaron Burr, who each held seventy-three electoral votes, resulting in the election was sent to the House of Representatives. In the end, the deadlock was resolved only by Alexander Hamilton, whose immense hate for Burr allowed Jefferson to claim the presidency. However, the election of 1800 was more than just a simple presidential election. The election of 1800 was the first peaceful transfer of power from the incumbent party to the opposition and represented a new step in politics, as well as a new direction in foreign policy that would emerge from Jefferson’s policies, and to this extent, the election of 1800 was a revolution.
In the presidential elections of 1980 and 1992, in both cases, the third party received a good amount of popular vote (Doc B). This should mean that they should receive electoral votes. But that’s not the case. This shows a dominance of our 2-party system. Even bet...
The presidential elections of 1860 was one of the nation’s most memorable one. The north and the south sections of country had a completely different vision of how they envision their home land. What made this worst was that their view was completely opposite of each other. The north, mostly republican supporters, want America to be free; free of slaves and free from bondages. While on the other hand, the south supporters, mostly democratic states, wanted slavery in the country, because this is what they earned their daily living and profit from.
"The U.S. presidential election of 1980 featured a contest between incumbent Democrat Jimmy Carter and his Republican opponent Ronald Reagan, along with a third party candidate, the liberal Republican John Anderson."(USPE1980, 1) By the beginning of the election season, the lengthy Iran hostage crisis sharpened public perceptions of a crisis. In the 1970s, the United States was experiencing a wrenching episode of low economic growth, high inflation and interest rates, intermittent energy crises. This added to a sense of discomfort that in both domestic and foreign affairs the nation was headed downward. With candidates and their reasons why they should be president, who would win the 1980 presidential election?
Today, political parties can be seen throughout everyday life, prevalent in various activities such as watching television, or seeing signs beside the road while driving. These everyday occurrences make the knowledge of political parties commonly known, especially as the two opposing political parties: the Republicans and the Democrats. Republican and Democrats have existed for numerous years, predominantly due to pure tradition, and the comfort of the ideas each party presents. For years, the existence of two political parties has dominated the elections of the president, and lower offices such as mayor, or the House of Representatives. Fundamentally, this tradition continues from the very emergence of political parties during the election of 1796, principally between Federalist John Adams and Anti-federalist Thomas Jefferson. Prior to this election people unanimously conformed to the ideas of one man, George Washington, and therefore did not require the need for political parties.1 However, following his presidency the public was divided with opposing opinions, each arguing the best methods to regulate the country. Ultimately, the emergence of different opinions regarding the future of the United States involving the economy, foreign relations, ‘the masses,’ and the interpretation of the Constitution, led to the two political parties of the 1790s and the critical election of 1800.
Article One, Section Four, Clause One of the US Constitution states that “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Place of Chusing Senators.” To many strict interpreters of the Constitution, this clause is exact evidence that redistricting must be carried out by Congress. Some lawyers, including those involved in a case in Arizona, believe the use of “legislature” in the constitution, refers to all branches of government, including voters, therefore claiming that an independent commission would also have that right. The Constitution was drafted during a time less divided by political parties and the use of districting to empower a single political party, likely never occurred to a congressman of that time. The Constitution covered a great array of governmental scenarios, but surely not every possible conflict could have been predicted or resolved. As seen in the passage of the 18th amendment, prohibition, and later in the repeal of the prohibition in the 21st amendment, different regulations are appropriate for different time periods. In this case, wise politicians like George Washington could have never predicted such great influence of political parties, that even a simple process like districting could be used to obtain power. With this idea in mind, revising a clause of the constitution may not be as far fetched as it may