Read all of Chapt 7. Post any clarification Qs here and FIVE thoughtful Qs.
– Bromley
19 Comments
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Read all of Chapt 7. Post any clarification Qs here and FIVE thoughtful Qs.
– Bromley
You must be logged in to post a comment.
1. Why is the American plurality election a single-member district? Does America want to stay with only two-parties?
2.Why do younger people differ from older people in their party identification? What about education in party identification?
3. Why have parties when so many people pledge to one side and vote for the other?
4.What are political party machines? How do they work? Why did they disappear?
5. Without money in the campaigns of Representatives and Senate races, where would we be in terms of publicizing candidates?
Clarification Questions:
What is an example of a “progressive social agenda”?
How does a filibuster help a bill pass or fail?
What successful candidates have worked with PACs and media instead of within a party?
If the Democratic Party is the oldest, why are the Republicans the GOP?
What is referenda?
What are the roles of the committees in each party?
What do they mean by “me-too” Republicanism?
Thoughtful Questions:
1. Isn’t it corruptive to the system that a party must put a wedge issue such as anti-abortion on the ticket just to get the vote of evangelicals, even if 70% of the nation and most of the party is for abortion?
2. In the early American Civil War times, the Republicans were the progressive and liberal party that promoted controversial ideas like freeing the slaves. Democrats, however had control of the south and supported the wealthy white plantation owners. When and for what reasons did the primary roles and beliefs of the political parties switch?
3.Candidates for high office positions must be able to raise up to millions of dollars in order to gain any support from the political parties or people. Doesn’t this campaign system take away the equality of opportunity our government promotes and make it extremely difficult for intelligent and qualified middle income people to rise to government positions?
4. If both Congress and the President are voted on primarily but the people, why are they usually different parties? If the majority of the people voted Democrat for the president, why would that same majority vote Republican when it comes to electing member of Congress?
5. What caused the Democratic Party to shift to supporting minorities when they were the ones originally fighting for slavery and discrimination?
1. How large of a role should party loyalty play in current political elections? Should the issues at hand and the candidates supporting them be considered more thoroughly?
2. Should congressional term limits be established to aid in candidate recruitment?
3. With the increased use of extensive data files to help predict election outcomes, how will this affect the interaction between the politicians and their constituency? Will groups that were previously considered and acknowledged suddenly be abandoned for a group that is determined to be a deciding factor in the race?
4. How is the two-party system more beneficial than a multiple-party system? If the argument is for stability, in the sense that in a multiple-party system the main parties become more radical to draw in those votes, then how is the two-party system different? Do the major parties not take radical ideas and incorporate them in order to please the people?
5. If the idea of independent spending through super PACs, 527s, and 501(3)(4)s is considered to be an abuse of the system, could this be considered as a form of piracy? Should it be applauded, or is this an exception?
1. What is flawed about the Two-Party system?
2. How can the current voting system be altered in place of the Electoral College if it were to be removed?
3. How has the shift from traditional Republican beliefs to be more radical affect citizens and their views upon Conservatism?
4. What ideas of the Democratic Party appeals most to voters to help the party gain support? Why are they more favored over the Republican Party?
5. How can the electoral process be changed to become more democratic?
Clarification:
Why will a third-party system never work out within American politics?
How can an individual have a “psychological tie” to a party?
What is a blue-collar worker?
Thoughtful Questions:
1. What is the main reason that America is one of the only nations to have a two-party party system? Would a two party system prosper in any other nations in the world?
2. Can the president’s change in opinion on certain issues cause their entire political party to shift their views as well?
3. Many powerful nations in the world have very successful voter turnout rates. How do they make this possible? Is the voter turnout in America low due to the limited number of elites and people in the political strata, or is the voter turnout low simply because people are not motivated to take action unless they are angered or want change?
4. When the American voters wanted change from a Republican president in 2008, they got what they wanted when the representative from the Democratic Party, Barak Obama, won the election. However, over his 4 year term, many people believed that Obama had not effectively solved any of America’s problems. If this is the case why didn’t Romney win in the 2012 election? Was this due to the fact that Obama had much more social media campaign than Romney? Were there other factors that led Obama to win the 2012 election?
5. Many presidential campaigns are funded by direct mail, the Rich, and PACs, none of which pertain to the general public. If these groups of people are funding campaign aren’t they essentially buying votes with their wealth and not allowing the general public to have a voice? If this is the case why was the Citizens United vs. FEC (Federal Election Commission) ruled in the favor of Citizen United?
1. Why did the midterm election cause so much unrest for the Democratic Party? Do midterm elections serve as an accurate indicator to term elections? What motivates the parties to hold expensive elections with no significance?
2. What is an example of a limit on Direct Popular Influence? How do politicians use this as a “Political Mechanism”
3. At what point did the government become divided so deeply between the two party system? Did this help or hurt representation?
4. If more parties existed, would the quality of representation be improved? Or would the increased numbers lend itself to backlog?
5. Can a president exist without the presence of a party to back him?
6. At the time of the Construction, why did so few groups step forward to establish a party? Is this example of a barrier to entry?
1. Are political parties needed? Why couldn’t we do these individually? I feel political parties are just useless annoying bureaucracies. Aren’t political parties pretty anachronistic in our age and time where ideas blend and overlap in all different aspects?
2. Why did the older party systems die out? Why did they not just develop instead of having new ones take their place?
3. Why do citizens associate themselves with political parties? Does it give them a sense of security, in a way being told what to do, who to vote for?
4. Why are there so many different limitations to the money that can be used and funded for a campaign? Why can’t we simply put a limit to the amount of money able to be used in one campaign?
5. Why is government and politics so complicated? What would happen if we were to simplify everything the way I wanted it to be?
If bills must be constantly compromised to please different party members, is congress truly able to pass bills that reflect the will of the people or rather a diluted politicized version?
Is it public opinion that’s influencing government leaders, or the other way around?
Just because the party-system has is an old institution in American history does that mean its still efficient?
Electoral realignment is always true, what then is the point of aligning with one specific party if its only going to change? Does this not make the two-party system arbitrary?
If voter turnout is so low due to the slowness of voter registration, why not automatically register all eligible americans considering its an essential liberty that citizens be allowed to vote?
bonus question: How much do you have to suck to have an entire political party arise simply to oppose you.
Answer: As much as Andrew Jackson. That’s all I have to say.
Why has the government come to the point where all parties are no longer thinking whats best for the people but are thinking how can I give the people something they want that I support so I can have more power in return?
Why is a lot of politics so manipulative, scheming, and sneaky? Why can’t it just have clean politics where its only trying to do the best interest of the people? (like clean debates, and campaigns without some second intention)
Why is their no limit on how long other positions in government can stay but there is one for the President? There should be a term limit in order to prevent incumbents taking over the government and making it harder for new fresh minds and bodies to be successful in elections.
Don’t incumbents help support the fact of seniority, it may make people think that because the person is more experienced that all their views are better. So why is it that Americans tend to think that because they have been in their more than once they should be there permanently?
How would America be affected if the Constitution was amended so that the only people that can run for any government position are natural-born citizens? Would America be better off or worse?
Has the tables turned for the political parties? Have they changed sides from what they represented in the early American colonies into what they were against in the beginning?
Clarifications
Do they recruit the candidates for local, state, and national office from young and make an agreement with their parents or something?
So people can be in office if they repeatedly get voted in from the year they start to the year they die? (With exceptions of course for the Executive Branch such as President and Vice President who clearly have term limits).
1. Since organizations accept governement regulation and try to become the ones who determine the regulations, is the government regulating the economy in the citizens’ of that nation best interests?
2. How did a two party system come into being in early America, when many of the leaders during that time were against it?
3. When does devotion, enthusiasm, an loyality to one’s political party become too extreme, like in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, where a person’s life is based on the success of that individual’s party?
4. Since the “media age” has made the political issues less important and has put a larger focus on the personal characteristics and looks of the candidates, are the best leaders being elected to best represent the citizens?
5. If two party systems truly allow for all groups to have a voice in government, then how can a new view on how the government should be set up be brought into a two party system where the two parties almost have no disagreement on how the government is set up?
Page 231 Question 5
If politicians can only campaign successfully and be elected to major offices if they have appropriate funds (which is an outlandish amount of money) and they can only obtain this amount of money from large corporations and Super PACs; then how can expect the politicians to serve our needs when they truly owe their election to those who funded their campaign? How has Citizens United v. FEC not been overturned or rather why do the people not realize that under the current system their voice is being stomped out the voices of those who funded the campaigns the elected?
Page Question 1
Why is America one of the only countries in the world to have a two party system? Why do European countries not embrace the two party system being most political beliefs fall into the left-right spectrum and would not a two party government be strong than a cohesive government? Moreover in America’s two party system most factions are represented in caucuses; very left-progressive caucus conservative left- Blue Dogs liberal right Rhino Republicans far right tea party is this distribution of faction not more successful than just establishing another party (even Bernie Sanders could be considered a democrat being that the farthest left belief is socialism and the beliefs of third parties are usually adopted by one of the two main parties.)?
Page 212 Question 2
Why if the Democrats hold a majority of voter identification do they not control the three branches of government or are able to establish tyranny of faction? Why do more people not identify as independent (with the purpose of having the majoring parties focus on actual issues and talking points done to appease the base as well as adopt policies that are favorable to a specific faction but also have a good effect on the country if enacted)?
Page 213 Question 3
If voter turnout so low in the United States then do the people have a right to be displeased with politicians? Why are elections in the United States not held on a Sunday or made into a universal holiday (so people are encouraged to vote)? Why do students, minorities and senior citizens allow their votes to be suppressed (if they really cared would they not go out and vote anyway) Would larger voter turnout produce better and more competent politicians?
Page 229 Question 4
Why is money more important than the issues in America, in that, even if you are the most able and accomplished candidate if you cannot fund a campaign you cannot run? Would American politics be better and the needs of people heard clearer if money was taken out of politics? Is money not speech but property?
1) What type of world would citizens live in if only one party dominated the rest? How would this be perceived by outside countries? Would this be accountable? Having one party would seem dominant and perhaps as something that the U.S. doesn’t want to be seems as?
2)The fact that, “[g]overnment leaders and private interest often use the media to shape and direct public opinion.” Does this mean that are values and customs could also be unintentionally be influenced by the power and influence of the parties?
3)Even though having a Democratic and Republican Party is a good way to offer to options to the people. Would it be relevant and possible for the (D) and (R) to join and “work together” to work around the majority beliefs that the citizens belief in?
4) In 2009 why did the Republican “preferred policy approaches that would require less government regulation of the market and less public spending? Is this actually a proper and reasonable way to handle such a bill: (health care)?
5) Is it fair to say the the Republican and Democratic party are focusing a lot more on competing and spending millions of dollars on having representatives of the party be part of the senate, HR, at any other office? Shouldn’t the focus be the people and how they are going to satisfy, protect, and make the people happy? Doesn’t seem that too much time and investment is provided to the popularity of the party not the values & beliefs of the party?
6) If the parties are “also a means by which those in government try to influence important groups in society”. What are these groups? How does the government influence them? What is the critical purpose of influencing these “important groups”?
In a two-party system, couldn’t one party eventually take over the majority and lead to tyranny?
Many people argue that America should go towards a three-party system, including third parties in presidential debates, etc. Why would this be better?
Is it possible to have political parties without having two dominant parties?
Do nonvoters in America do so democratically or because they don’t care?
Why is it that we spend so much money on elections that could be used towards actually useful things?
1. If the founders hated partisanship and the problems of it have caused Congress not to be able to pass many laws or get things done, why not try and remove the two party system, or replace it with something else?
2. Why hasn’t a third party become majorly popular within American politics in the late 20th to early 21st century, especially with the vast amount of information access we have today?
3. Is it right to have people who vote on party loyalty? Shouldn’t the man who is best for the job be getting the votes, not someone simply because they have a shiny blue or red sticker?
4. Is the electoral college really something that remains useful for society, especially after what happened in 2000? While it pushes away from focusing on the cities, it still only magnifies three-five key “tossup” states.
5. Would it be better to have publicly financed elections so that our politicians finally begin to truly represent our interests, and not the corporations?
1. Did new parties that have arisen throughout history ever have a chance of success? Or does the circumstance of the electoral college prevent that?
2. Are political parties more about policy or fundamental ideals? How have historical events shifted party lines?
3. Is all politics entrepenureal? How does fundraising and the need for fundraising impact the platform of the candidate, the time of the candidate speaking about real issues, and the outcome of the election?
4. To what extent have the primary/caucus system produced more polarized candidates? How does this affect their internal efficacy in office ?
5. Who really determines what the issues are in elections? The parties/political elite, or the voters?
What is reconciliation?
Who Decides when a party is a recognized party?
What is referenda?
What causes electoral realignments to occur?
Why was FDR’s plan called “New Deal”?
Why do 3rd parties have a harder time when trying to have a large effect on politics?
Why is the single-member-district in place if parties are not part of the government?
Why do people tie themselves to a party?
Why does race, ethnicity, religion, gender, geography, and social background matter?
If nothing is going wrong, then what is the incentive to vote?
Why did party workers disappear?
Do we WANT the uneducated to vote?
With Americans becoming more knowledgeable on social issues, is the electoral college likely to disappear??
What caused people to vote for Obama and not Clinton?
Republicans disliked McCain, but liked Palin?
If Obama was white, would he have won?
Could a poor, but very intelligent person, ever have a chance of election?
Why are private funds allowed to fuel an election?
Why does it really matter what happens in a politician’s personal life if it doesn’t affect their political decisions?
With the ubiquity of the internet, and the ability to access news everywhere, why is it still necessary for a president to live in the states for 14 years, or for a representative to live in the state they are representing?
If parties are corporations, then why are they so closely tied with the government?
Why is African Americans the PC term when referring to black people, when black people are not necessarily American, and are not necessarily from Africa?
During the Era of Good Feelings, what was stopping other parties from emerging?
1) According to the book, a serious candidate must be able to raise from thousands to millions of dollars for their campaigns. This gives me the assumption that elected seats in congress are essentially only for deep pocketed people. Well then why can’t a candidate with limited resources be considered serious?
2) Unfortunately, most people, when viewing the candidates for office, jump to conclusions based on a candidate’s political view. Have the political parties become so polarized that little consideration is given to candidates with opposing political ideas?
3) Do PACs resemble European guilds? What are their influences on candidates once they are elected into office?
4) The regulation of elections is defended by an equality’s standpoint. That all candidates running for public office get equal chances of being elected. However, do these regulations conflict with the liberty’s standpoint? More clashing of fundamental values?
5) The Electoral College was technically an experiment set up by the framers since they had no prior experience with choosing executives. Why don’t we modify or get rid of the system? Firstly, it violates the whole idea of “one person, one vote”, which is an essential key element of democracy. Secondly, it creates the whole issue of “swing” states, which are based solely on demographics.
Chapter 7 Questions
1. Would our government change if we had an interest group elect its members to office? How are interest groups limited?
2. Is it unfair having the majority party (the party that holds majority of seats in the House of Senate), elect the House speaker? Is there another way of changing this process?
3. Throughout the previous years (2000-2010) there has not been an electoral realignment. Does this affect the political parties or does this mean nothing?
4. In regards to campaigning, why is so much money needed and where does all the money exactly go to?
5. How did Reagan’s tough approach to foreign policy as well as his positions against affirmative action affect the political parties during the 1980s?