Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Political philosophy issues
Political philosophy issues
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Stephen J. Dubner and Steven D. Levitt believe that voting in an election is seemingly ineffective, that the chances of you winning a lottery and actually affecting an election are very similar. This article I’m analyzing questions why we vote, and if voting is even worth your time.
Dubner and Levitt make their argument by first taking the reader through their own thought process of why people vote in the first place. They came up with three possibilities. First, that some people still believe they can effect an election. Second, maybe people vote in the same idea that they play the lottery, for the fun and spirit of winning on such a slim margin. Third, some people have the idea that voting is our civic duty, and they’ll feel guilty for not voting. Getting into why people vote shows the reader that voting is really not that important. If the reader just recently voted, they would look at this and realize why they actually voted, and understand more where Dubner and Levitt are coming
…show more content…
from. This is a great way to start off the article, it draws the reader in because it can personally relate to them. Dubner and Levitt then answer the reader’s biggest question: What if nobody votes?
Would there even be an election anymore? Dubner and Levitt provide a similar example. They tell it in the form of a short story, with dialogue between the reader and their daughter.Telling a short, relatable story like that draws the reader closer to the article, making it easier for them to understand the argument. Further, if the reader has a daughter, they can picture this scenario in their head and make an even closer connection to this article and their argument.
Next, Dubner and Levitt compare elections today to elections in the past. Political parties used to give people an incentive to voting, by rewarding them with money or whiskey. Seeing that, why do people bother to vote now? There’s no real reward for it. The way Dubner and Levitt brought up something that was better, and comparing it to now, makes today's voting seem much worse and useless. This is another strong point to their
argument. The article then compares US voting to voting in Switzerland. The Swiss were one of the first countries to introduce mail-in ballots. The idea behind mail-in ballots is that it’s easier and quicker for the voter, and cheaper all around. It was predicted that the number of voters would increase, but in fact the opposite happened. Dubner and Levitt questioned this, why would any not vote if it’s cheaper and easier? With this in mind, the reader now has something to compare the US government with. Bringing up different governments in different countries helped support Dubner and Levitt’s ideas because it showed people that it’s not only the US that’s like this, it’s worldwide. This gives the reader a feeling of comfort and assurance that nothing is majorly wrong with our country. The final theory Dubner and Levitt bring up connects all the way back to the beginning of the article. They ask the question, what is the incentive for voting? Why would any citizen bother to vote if their vote won’t change anything? Dubner and Levitt connected all their ideas into one reason: self-interest. Voting with a mail-in ballot lifts the pressure of going to polls, which makes voting seem useless. The pressure of going to the polls reminds people that they have to go vote. Dubner and Levitt’s final theory is that the most valuable payoff for voting is being seen at the polls by a friend or co-worker. This is the conclusion to this article, and it helps the reader connect all the ideas previously stated into one main theory. The reader leaves with a sense of completion and a new understanding of what their vote is really worth.
Americans and Britons had a stronger sense of civic duty and and civic competence, believed they could “do something’ about an unjust law, and that citizens should be active in one’s community. While Americans lagged behind Austria, the Netherlands, West Germany, and the United Kingdom in voter participation, they seemed to be much more involved in other areas such as campaigning, being active in the local community, and contacting government official. But in “Bowling Alone,” Robert Putnam states that not only has voter turnout declined, but so has citizen participation in politics and government. This is because they are more self-reliant now. People do not vote because they do not care. They believe the democratic values this nation was built upon do not exist
"Miller light and bud light…either way you end up with a mighty weak beer!" This is how Jim Hightower (a Texan populist speaker) described the choices that the U.S. electorate had in the 2000 elections. This insinuates that there is a clear lack of distinction between the parties. Along with numerous others, this is one of the reasons why the turnout is so low in the U.S. elections. In trying to explain the low figures at the U.S. elections, analysts have called American voters apathetic to indifferent to downright lazy. I disagree that the 50% (in recent elections) of voters that fail to turnout to vote are lazy and that they have just reason not too. I will also show that the problem lies within the system itself in that the institutional arrangements, electoral and governmental, do not create an environment that is conducive to mass participation. I will address these main issues and several others that have an effect on voter participation. In doing so I will compare America to other established democracies.
Voting is at the center of every democratic system. In america, it is the system in which a president is elected into office, and people express their opinion. Many people walk into the voting booth with the thought that every vote counts, and that their vote might be the one that matters above all else. But in reality, America’s voting system is old and flawed in many ways. Electoral College is a commonly used term on the topic of elections but few people actually know how it works.
The United States national elections have been experiencing a steady decline of eligible voters showing up to vote. This steady decline has been ongoing since experiencing a significant increase in voter turnout from 1948 through 1960. Over the years there has been significant, meticulous research done to try to pinpoint the cause of the decline in voter turnout over years. All of this research has led to the production of an enormous number of literatures written on the perceived causes. The vast amount of literature produced has led to a number of competing explanations about this decline. The quest for the answer to the question of, why this decline in voter turnout, is very important for an overwhelming majority of Americans and our democratic system because the people/voters can only truly be represented by our government if all eligible voters go out and vote. For this paper I will examine four theories that attempt to explain the decline. The four theories that I will discuss are voting barriers, campaign contributions, negative campaign advertising, and finally the cultural explanation. However, through thorough exploration and critiques of the strengths and weaknesses of these four theories, we will find that the cultural explanation theory is currently the most persuasive theory in the group. Finally, I will also explore some reasons as to why citizens do vote as well.
The Chartist movement (a working class political movement) in 1840 believed “People had no one else but themselves to blame for the actions of their politicians” (Nash). What Mr. Nash and the chartist movement believe couldn’t be more on the spot. This country has gotten to the point where people find it hard to walk down their street to the elementary school where the voting polls are, and take a few minutes to cast a vote. A vote that millions of people around the world wish they were able to have them selves. With all the political suffrage that goes on through the world and people forced to love a leader, these no-shows should be thankful to live in a democracy. A place where elections aren’t rigged and the people are truly heard. This is why the topic of voting turnout needs to be raised. Also it’s very annoying to hear people complaining about our President when they did not even vote. It’s a very bad habit to not vote, and it needs to change with the younger citizens of this country. Helping younger people see the importance of voting needs to start with technological and educational ideas while expanding all the way to social event ideas. Only then will America’s ability to find answers to voting turnout increase.
Among the many ways Americans can participate in politics, voting is considered one of the most common and important ways for Americans to get involved. The outcome of any election, especially at the national level, determines who will be making and enforcing the laws that all Americans must abide by. With this in mind one might assume that all Americans are active voters, but studies show the voter turnout is actually astonishingly low. With this unsettling trend it is important to know what statistics say about voter turnout as was as the four major factors that influence participation: Socioeconomic status, education, political environment, and state electoral laws, in order to help boost turnout in future elections.
Time management is not an easy thing to accomplish, especially in the United States. Everyone is constantly in motion trying to get things done and the limited time frame they have to work with. Therefore, the priority one task holds falls within the time frame it can be taken care of in. This is why many people do not vote. When looking at the data from 2012 election in Texas, the hours when one could cast a vote during the primaries, run off and general election was seven in the morning to seven in the evening on Tuesdays (“2012 Polling Hours”). Times like these are what prevent the voting turnout from increasing over the years. As stated in the book, voting involves making ot...
It’s not an everyday thing where you need to leave your house and go vote. In primary election of 2016, I voted. When I stepped into the poll, I felt like I was making a very important decision. At the same time, I felt like how most of us feel when we vote; a little fish in the ocean. We may not notice it but every vote counts. It has been proven that when a majority of the population votes during an election, there is a higher chance of having a successful democracy. That’s how I feel. The more votes, the
Shenkman, R. (2008). Just How Stupid Are We?: Facing the Truth About the American Voter. New York: Basic Books.
Over the recent year’s American voters have brought back a way of voting that was used during the country’s old age of existence, this rediscovered act is known as early voting. Early voting started in the early 1990s, though the outcome has not had such a high consistency over the years it is still recommended to help the Election Day process in the country. Since voter turnout is not entirely consistent due to the process being constantly shortened by state laws, the argument against early voting is that it is a waste of taxpayers’ money, opponents believe it is ineffective. Although that is not the case, in his 2016 blog article, “A Brief History of Early Voting,” Michael McDonald inform readers on the brief history of early voting as he states how the rates of voters who has cast their ballots before election day has increased over the years, “from less than a tenth to about a third” (qtd. in McDonald) since the 1990s. This proves to show why the money being spent on this act is not simply being wasted. Although early voting has
There were many steps in the struggle of voting in America between the late 1700’s and early 2000’s, but this analysis focuses on the main restrictions and the over comings of these limitations to the Wh...
In the article “The Lottocracy,” the author Alexander Guerrero makes some bold assessments toward the current system of electing representatives. Alexander Guerrero reflects on the general attitude people have toward voting, analyzes why people vote the way they do and how the system is flawed. It is easy to fall into a state of thinking that one vote does not make a difference when one considers that there is little difference between the candidates. Ethos, pathos, and logos are present throughout the article to persuade and convince the audience of how flawed the current system. Guerrero appeals to his reader’s sense of logic by using examples of statistical analysis that outlines the demographics of those who are currently serving in elected
Voter turnout has been declining in the United States throughout history, due to the potential voters’ personal choice not to vote and ineligibility. According to research, a large percentage of individuals are not voting because political parties fail to appeal to the voters and this leads to the voting population losing interest in the campaign, while others postpone registering and by the time they realize their delay the election is upon them. This downward trend of voter turnout can be traced to the reforms of the Progressive era. Turnout in post-Progressive era America remained low, never reaching the levels attained before the Progressive era reforms. This would be expected, since there is little in the political history of these years that would indicate a return to a collectively oriented system of voter participation.
Rather than pushing for voting rights, Washington argues “it is more important that we be prepared for voting” (74) through productivity. Merely allowing for all to vote would not immediately create wiser voters. By teaching a society a means of practical economic self-sufficiency, Washington argues this creates an atmosphere of Christian values such as “forbearance, longsuffering, and forgiveness” (74), benefiting the community in the long
Everyone has the right to vote, or not to vote in the years we live today. People decide whether they wish to participate in the nation’s future or just walk aimlessly and allow it to take its own path. Over decades, centuries, our country continued growing but just recently did it allow all to vote as long as they call this nation home. Run-on Sentence: Over decades, centuries, our country continued growing, but just recently did it allow all to vote as long as they call this nation home. However, large amounts of people still do not vote in any politics. Today everyone should understand what differences a vote could make like what can happen, why it matters, and benefits of voting.