The Presidential Election Elections Election

The 1980 presidential election of the United States featured three primary candidates, Republican Ronald Reagan, Democrat Jimmy Carter and liberal Republican John Anderson. Ronald Reagan was the governor of California before he decided to run for the presidency. John Anderson was a representative in Illinois and Carter was the incumbent. The lengthy Iran hostage crisis sharpened public opinions by the beginning of the election season. In the 1970s, the United States were experiencing a straining episode of low economic growth, high price increases and interest rates and an irregular energy crisis. The sense of discomfort in both domestic and foreign affairs in the nation were heading downward, this added to the downward spiral that was already going on. Between Carter, Anderson and Reagan, the general election campaign of the 1980s seemed more concerned with shadowboxing around political issues rather than a serious discussion of the issues that concerned voters.

Assess the extent to which incumbents have an adage over challengers in congressional elections. (25marks)

The United States Presidential elections are often events that captivate and interest a number of people around the world. The 2000 U.S. presidential election was particularly notable for more than one reason. Certainly, the fact that an election year in the year 2000, the marking of the next millennium and next century, is significant in of itself. In addition, there were a number of critical issues facing the candidates in this election, as with any election. The role, presence, and influence of the United States media were additional factors that heightened the tension of the 2000 presidential election. The election itself was fraught with controversy. The Supreme Court had to be involved and render a ruling with respect to accusation of fraudulent vote counting. Overall, the 2000 United States Presidential Election is an election that is remembered for controversy, polarization of the American public, as well as issues of confusion and mistrust between the American public and the American government.

Presidential election cycles are always three-ring circuses, and the 2000 election has become one of the biggest circuses ever. With a two-term president unable to seek re-election, the House of Representatives clearly up for grabs, and Democrats counting on major Senate gains -- even hoping to win control -- there is a lot at stake in this year's elections. Republicans' optimism is based on their view that they will take back the White House after an eight-year hiatus. GOP insiders believe that Americans are tired of Bill Clinton, have doubts about Vice President Al Gore and are ready for change. Republican turnout was down in 1998, which helps account for the party's poor showing in the off-year

The 2016 Presidential election is coming up and candidates are fighting to get votes to be their party’s candidate. Ted Cruz is a Republican Protestant running for President with very conservative values hoping to bring America the change it needs. The Republicans have many people running for office that excite voters’ interest because they are not politicians. Although, Ted Cruz is a politician and stands behind it using his background in politics to gain ground. His political ad “Blessing” shows him as a man grounded in religious values and will use those values to be the best candidate for President of the United States. Ted Cruz successfully appeals to religious Republicans using different rhetorical strategies to persuade them to vote for him to be the Republican candidate for the 2016 Presidential election.

This year’s presidential election is is being referred to as one that will be historic. While the 2016 presidential campaign has in fact caused social and political disagreement, each candidate beginning and remaining candidate in the presidential race brought forth issues in our nation for table discussion. One of the most debated topics during the primary elections and caucus season was the issue of immigrants and illegal immigration. During this time, current Republican front runner Donald Trump declared accusations towards the Mexican and Hispanic community as being part of the American downfall. While making vulgar remarks earned the GOP candidate publicity and support from anti-immigration reform holders, Trump’s remarks also brought forth the argument into the light.

The results of both the 2004 and 2012 Presidential elections were the same as both incumbents were able to capitalize on the voters being comfortable with them. Additional, since both incumbents had access to national assets, four years of on the job training, and “insider information” they were able to speak in-depth on a wide range of issues both foreign and domestic. In 2004, the largest and most important issue to the nation was the war in Iraqi and in 2012 it was the nation’s economy. Given the incumbents access to firsthand information on the issues at large, they were able to weaken their opponents in the nation’s eyes by dismantling the candidate’s strategies on the issues. History has shown that nations trend to focus more on domestic

The 2012 presidential election was fundamentally different than the presidential election of 2004. In 2004, George W Bush defeated John Kerry with 62,028,719 votes, which was essentially 50.8 percent of the ballots cast. In 2004 the issue that was of most concern for Americans was terrorism. Furthermore, the attacks on September 11th 2001 served in bringing the country together to help secure the win for Bush. The polling data shows that 52 percent of the people believed that Bush would do a better job dealing with terrorism and homeland security, versus 29 percent for Kerry. Voters seemed to prefer Bush in dealing with problems in Iraq, 50 to 37 and furthermore, on moral issues, by 47 to 29. Kerry was ahead 48 to 32 on jobs and unemployment and by a fairly wide margin of 51 to 28 on health care. When comparing how people voted, Kerry had the majority of

There are many differences between the presidential and congressional elections. The requirements differ from both presidential and congressional elections. To run for congress one must be at least 25 years old and must have been at least a US citizens for at least seven years, and sometimes convicted felons have been able to successfully run for congress and some have won a seat. On the other hand, to run for president one must be at least 35 years old, must be a natural born citizen, and have been residing in the United States for 14 years to run for president. In addition, the congressional elections are the lesser known or televised by the media and are more local than the presidential elections. As a result of being more local and

Entering the campaign, Bush wanted to keep his public figure as a steady commander in chief during dangerous times. As for Kerry, his focus was on reducing joblessness, the national deficit, increase healthcare coverage, and roll back on tax cuts Bush had secured for America’s wealthiest. Kerry was seen as more in touch with the daily needs of the ordinary voter. As only eighteen months had passed since the start of the Iraq war and three years after September 11, 2001, where nearly 3,000 people were killed, it was expected that the main concerns going into the general election was how each candidate would handle terrorism and the war. Throughout the election, the country looked to its candidates to prove how they would deal with the main issues going on during this time.. Looking back at 2004, the three main issues were the war in Iraq, terrorism, and the economy. A poll was given by Gallup News to Americans about the important issues in the election, the poll showed,“Nearly half of all Americans, 49% ,say that presidential candidates’ stances on the economy and on terrorism will be extremely important to their vote in the next year.” Behind these two issues was 46%of the pollsters stating that the war in Iraq was a main issue for their vote. As these three issues stayed relevant throughout the entire election, the stance that the candidates took were crucial for gaining

To sum up the 2016 presidential election cycle in one word: anomalous. Unconventional candidates and unprecedented campaign strategies made for one of the zaniest election years to date. And yet, this election was not free from the traditional problems regarding voter turnout, which has historically had a tremendous impact on the results of elections; whichever demographics turn out—or fail to—on that fateful Tuesday will determine the winners and the losers. Logically, then, the federal government should want to give as many people as possible the chance to get to the polls. However, this is simply not the case. The American Election day falls on a work day, unlike that of many global democratic counterparts. As such, work obligations frequently prevent a large proportion of Americans from casting their ballots, thereby potentially skewing the election results, and acting as a form of voter suppression. Making election day a holiday would prove to be entirely too costly to the economy; instead, election day should simply fall on a weekend day. This would give more Americans the opportunity to exercise their democratic rights and therefore result in a more accurate reflection of the desires of the American people.

Yup, that’s right, only about 10% of the entire nation voted for Donald Trump OR Hilary Clinton, yet they are still the Presidential Candidates from the Republican and Democratic Parties. How? In the presidential primaries Donald Trump won the state of Alabama with roughly 43% of all the voters. However, only .3% of registered voters voted for him at all. In a state of 4.8 million, only 14000 voted. In Tennessee, Hillary won with 66% of 3.7% of the total registered. While substantially higher than Trump’s Alabama win, it is still an unacceptably low turnout for the voting of the possible President of the

The central question that my research paper is trying to answer is why do some states vote drastically different at the state level verses the federal level? I am particularly looking at the differences between Gubernatorial and Presidential races in the time frame of 1980 to 2016. Despite our hyper partisan political climate, there are numerous examples of states who in the most recent election voted heavily for Hillary Clinton (Maryland, Massachusetts, Vermont) or Donald Trump (Montana, Louisiana) who have governors of the opposite party who are in power and popular. Over the course of my reading I encountered several explanations as to why the public is willing to vote differently for Governor compared to President. I have decided to

Donald Trump 's victory in the 2016 presidential election took many people by surprise. Pollsters, political analysts, news anchors and even celebrities expressed shock that a Washington outsider could triumph over a candidate with Hillary Clinton 's history in politics. Clinton and Trump expressed views throughout their campaigns that were in direct opposition, including their opinions on the Dodd-Frank Act, the legislation that spawned the controversial Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. As you may know, the CFPB has proposed sweeping new regulations for short-term, small-dollar installment loans that could effectively eliminate these types of loans. Although the Dodd-Frank and the CFPB have received a great deal of support from President Obama as well as Clinton, Trump has repeatedly vowed to "dismantle" both the agency and the Dodd-Frank. This has led to speculation that Trump 's election may be a death blow to Obama 's plan to kill non-collateralized personal installment loans.

America is warming up everyday due to the presidential election, which is going to be held on on Nov 8, 2016. People are talking about the upcoming presidential election everywhere. It is the best time for them to speak on for and against to the candidates. Even the general people are so excited about their favorite candidate to win this presidential election race, they keep on talking about Hilary should win because of this and that reason and some say Donald J Trump should win because of this and that reason etc.