PDA

View Full Version : Educate me just how do american politics work?



Mar 5th, 2008, 08:18 AM
So the another night watching the news Hillary Clinton vs Barack Obama sega.I allways wondered just how the amercian voting,election system works anybody care to explain please?

EDIT:Ooops i forgot wrong forum sorry :picard:

Cheeto
Mar 5th, 2008, 01:08 PM
Okay, here's the way I was taught it and this is skipping a lot of details.

First a person announces their candidacy for one party or another (or independent, if they feel like losing), and it can be anyone as long as they fulfill the requirements to be president. They campaign for a while, make people like them, and then come the primaries. Each state will hold either a primary or a caucus (except Texas, which has both). In a primary, you go and vote for either a democratic candidate you like or a republican candidate you like. In a caucus you elect a delegate to go and do the voting. At the end of that is the national convention for each party, where all the delegates you elected or told who you want will do the actual voting for one candidate or another. Now this is all just to decide who will run for president on a certain party's ticket. So the democrats will pick one of their people (Hillary or Obama) and the republicans will pick one of theirs (pretty much just McCain at this point). Once that's done, you now have two candidates for the presidency and they start to campaign all over again for your presidential vote.

Once election day comes, you go back to the polls and cast your vote for who you want to be PRESIDENT this time, not just a nominee. Again each state does this part differently, but this is where the electoral college comes in. Each state has a certain number of electoral votes based on population. In some states, they hand out the electoral votes proportionally to how many votes each candidate received from all the people (so 100 electoral votes and 10,000,000 people; if 2 million vote for one candidate then they receive 20 of those votes and the other person gets 80). Some states are winner take all. At the end of it, whoever has the most electoral votes wins the grand poobah asshole award of being the president.

This is a cut down version, there is also the question of districting, failsafes in case of a tie, and super delegates.

Stellar
Mar 5th, 2008, 11:49 PM
Gerrymandering: When a party cuts district lines to increase their probability of winning an upcoming election. This is done to preserve house seats.

Useful pieces of knowledge:

House Seats: The incumbent has about a 98% win rate. The only competitive House seat election is an OPEN house seat election. This means neither potential candidates are an incumbent for said house seat.

Electoral College: A state is given a certain number of electoral college seats. This number comes from the total number of Senators + House Reps.
So, any state has to have at least 3 electoral votes: 2 Senators and 1 House Rep. The only exception is Washington D.C.

Primaries: This current primary election season is FAR more competitive than the standard nomination process. The Iowa Caucus and New Hampshire primary usually set the momentum for how the rest of the primaries are going to play out.


More to come when I'm not lazy

Mar 6th, 2008, 07:38 AM
Thank's guys.

Cheeto
Mar 6th, 2008, 01:29 PM
The only reason senators and representatives have such an easy re-election bid is because no ones knows shit about their reps or senators so they either don't vote or just vote for the guy in office to feel like they participated. They don't know who has what issues.

Except Ted Stevens.

Stellar
Mar 6th, 2008, 08:31 PM
Very true. Competition is practically non-existent. No one cares enough to go out of their way to learn about their local Congressman or state Senator. I feel like it's the media's fault. If they placed more focus on political education rather than Paris Hilton's snatch, people might know something.

2ltben
Mar 8th, 2008, 05:35 PM
The West Wing was on for seven years.

HS the Whap
Mar 8th, 2008, 08:35 PM
Someone could of just said "Not very well" and saved you some time.

pornbeard
Mar 8th, 2008, 10:29 PM
the system was designed when our nation was a collection of states who considered themselves something like independent countries, and that had a lot of influence.


it doesnt really work that way anymore, but the old vestiges are still around, and are seen by many as being straight dumb. like the electoral college.

2ltben
Mar 9th, 2008, 02:11 AM
the system was designed when our nation was a collection of states who considered themselves something like independent countries, and that had a lot of influence.


it doesnt really work that way anymore, but the old vestiges are still around, and are seen by many as being straight dumb. like the electoral college.
What other method do you suggest that would still keep America a two-party state?

Cheeto
Mar 10th, 2008, 01:15 AM
We have the technology, we can rebuild it, we can make it faster, better, easier. A single vote, no electoral college system.

HS the Whap
Mar 10th, 2008, 04:33 AM
We have the technology, we can rebuild it, we can make it faster, better, easier. A single vote, no electoral college system.
Bull shit. This is how I want my elections to go:
1) Do away with primaries, they're crap.
2) Do away with voting, its crap.
3) Candidates have to get 1,500,000 signatures onto a petition.
4) On voting day, all candidates that have the required signatures meet in a field in North Dakota and do Rock, Paper, Scissors... best 33,333 out of 55,555.

Over the next month, those who survive and win the most games becomes our leader.

Crispulus
Mar 10th, 2008, 05:15 AM
Some states like Maine are working in laws that hold that their electoral votes follow the national popular vote, and not their own state popular vote.

By 2012 or 2016, the electoral college will be effectively bypassed.

MY quick fix scenario.

AUTOMATIC redistricting of House of Representative closer to a 50/50 split per district.

98% incumbancy rate is just awful. It should be a bloodbath of ideas every two years. Get are more accuarate pulse on the country.

Mar 10th, 2008, 08:46 AM
Someone could of just said "Not very well" and saved you some time.

LOL.

Mr. Burns
Mar 10th, 2008, 03:01 PM
We have the technology, we can rebuild it, we can make it faster, better, easier. A single vote, no electoral college system.
Bull shit. This is how I want my elections to go:
1) Do away with primaries, they're crap.
2) Do away with voting, its crap.
3) Candidates have to get 1,500,000 signatures onto a petition.
4) On voting day, all candidates that have the required signatures meet in a field in North Dakota and do Rock, Paper, Scissors... best 33,333 out of 55,555.

Over the next month, those who survive and win the most games becomes our leader.
Seconded. Call to vote?

WHEATLEY007
Mar 11th, 2008, 01:47 PM
the system was designed when our nation was a collection of states who considered themselves something like independent countries, and that had a lot of influence.


it doesnt really work that way anymore, but the old vestiges are still around, and are seen by many as being straight dumb. like the electoral college.
What other method do you suggest that would still keep America a two-party state?

Thats someting I dont get. Why just two parties? I've never understood why many Americans (admittedly, mostly those I see on telly) seem to claim an allegance to one party and that party only, no matter who is heading that party or wether they agree with that parties current policies.

Burris
Mar 11th, 2008, 02:22 PM
Because American's have been lead to believe that the fat cats from both parties are so radically different yet so similar to the people that they should vote for them. When you have two parties in power on and off for 150 years, they begin to work together to keep others out of their club.

I hate it. My Poli Sci professor a couple semesters ago got into an argument with me about Italy vs US political system. While Italy is pretty much crappy as far as people sticking with a person, I think the multi-party system better represents others beliefs as a whole.

Penguin
Mar 11th, 2008, 03:05 PM
Thats someting I dont get. Why just two parties?

Because the Whig party couldn't make up its collective mind on slavery and the Bull Moose Party wanted Teddy Roosevelt, not Charles Evans Hughes.


I've never understood why many Americans (admittedly, mostly those I see on telly) seem to claim an allegance to one party and that party only, no matter who is heading that party or wether they agree with that parties current policies.

Because (Democrats/Republicans) are stupid, and only stupid people vote for (Democrats/Republicans). God, I'm glad I'm not a (Democrat/Republican). They're all (effete metrosexuals/borderline retarded rednecks), and they're all (closet Communists/wannabe brownshirts). It's so much better to be a (Democrat/Republican). We understand the real value of (helping each other out/rugged individualism), unlike the (Democrats/Republicans) who would gladly (give all my money to deadbeats and rapists/throw this country into another world war to feel important). Also, when they're not trying to (slave tax me/bring about Armageddon), they're trying to (control us under the guise of controlling guns/control us under the guise of protecting us from terrorism). They're also out to regulate (my property/my body). They also generally (promote/attack) drinking water flouridation, a (commonsense way to protect teeth/a Communist plot to sap and impurify our precious bodily fluids). A gram is better than a damn.

Burris
Mar 11th, 2008, 04:31 PM
Good post! Hurrah!

Shade-of-Grey
Mar 11th, 2008, 05:22 PM
Thats someting I dont get. Why just two parties?

Because the Whig party couldn't make up its collective mind on slavery and the Bull Moose Party wanted Teddy Roosevelt, not Charles Evans Hughes.


I've never understood why many Americans (admittedly, mostly those I see on telly) seem to claim an allegance to one party and that party only, no matter who is heading that party or wether they agree with that parties current policies.

Because (Democrats/Republicans) are stupid, and only stupid people vote for (Democrats/Republicans). God, I'm glad I'm not a (Democrat/Republican). They're all (effete metrosexuals/borderline retarded rednecks), and they're all (closet Communists/wannabe brownshirts). It's so much better to be a (Democrat/Republican). We understand the real value of (helping each other out/rugged individualism), unlike the (Democrats/Republicans) who would gladly (give all my money to deadbeats and rapists/throw this country into another world war to feel important). Also, when they're not trying to (slave tax me/bring about Armageddon), they're trying to (control us under the guise of controlling guns/control us under the guise of protecting us from terrorism). They're also out to regulate (my property/my body). They also generally (promote/attack) drinking water flouridation, a (commonsense way to protect teeth/a Communist plot to sap and impurify our precious bodily fluids). A gram is better than a damn.
i actually lol'd at that last bit. first time i've lol'd at a post in a while. oh man.

Stellar
Mar 12th, 2008, 12:08 AM
hahah yeah...nice post penguin.


and he's pretty much right. the whigs failed during the mid 19th century and since then emerged the current Democratic and Republican parties

Burris
Mar 12th, 2008, 01:07 AM
I actually hate Metros and Rednecks. Although I probably hate Rednecks more. Stupid fucking hicks and their pickup trucks with CSA flags. "I'M GONNA RIDE THIS GUYS ASS BECAUSE I'M IN A PICKUP TRUCK LISTENIN' TO TOBAY KAYTH"

You're in fucking Michigan.

2ltben
Mar 14th, 2008, 03:35 AM
A multiparty system prevents legislators from crossing the aisle. Unless they're incredibly popular, and there arn't many of those at all, crossing the party line gets you thrown out on your ass as an independent (and you can kiss your incumbent election goodbye). By having only two parties, not only does it ensure that the mainstream political parties must take a stance on an issue, it means that members don't need to worry about retributions outside of losing political capital. In a multiparty system, there's a good chance something like the Creationism in science classrooms debate never would have surfaced. Mainstream parties wouldn't risk bringing the party championing the issue into the spotlight.

HS the Whap
Mar 14th, 2008, 01:28 PM
I actually hate Metros and Rednecks. Although I probably hate Rednecks more. Stupid fucking hicks and their pickup trucks with CSA flags. "I'M GONNA RIDE THIS GUYS ASS BECAUSE I'M IN A PICKUP TRUCK LISTENIN' TO TOBAY KAYTH"

You're in fucking Michigan.

I always crack up when I am up north and see those retards with the CSA Flags. When I'm in the South I some-what understand it, but if you're anywhere north of Virgina it should be a fucking crime... though it is the easiest way for someone to announce the fact that they are mentally retarded.