American Political System: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
MediaWiki does not handle this diff well -- I moved up the last paragraph to the head of the Primary section, then elaborated on the process. |
m Goof. |
||
| Line 308: | Line 308: | ||
The majority of elections for office are a competition between two major candidates, one Republican and one Democrat. How each party picks their candidate is totally up to them (except in California, where the state has a blanket primary in place). As a general rule, winning a primary requires [[Pandering to the Base]], while winning a general election requires appealing to centrist "swing voters". Expect accusations of "flip-flopping," particularly from an incumbent opponent who has the luxury of sitting out the primary. It's considered an ''especially'' bad sign of a politician's career if he or she faces a serious primary challenge as an incumbent, as that means that the party that put them in office is seriously considering kicking them ''out''. |
The majority of elections for office are a competition between two major candidates, one Republican and one Democrat. How each party picks their candidate is totally up to them (except in California, where the state has a blanket primary in place). As a general rule, winning a primary requires [[Pandering to the Base]], while winning a general election requires appealing to centrist "swing voters". Expect accusations of "flip-flopping," particularly from an incumbent opponent who has the luxury of sitting out the primary. It's considered an ''especially'' bad sign of a politician's career if he or she faces a serious primary challenge as an incumbent, as that means that the party that put them in office is seriously considering kicking them ''out''. |
||
Every state has laws which regulate this practice but each law is written by the parties, so they can choose whatever they want. There is also sometimes tension between state and national party organizations about the process, because each state wants its primary to have as large an influence on the final selection as possible. In 2012, several states moved their primaries earlier in the season, to have greater sway in determining which candidates get "momentum" (starting with Florida, which kicked off a cascade of state parties shifting their primaries up -- including some which passed laws essentially stating that they would hold their primaries a week before any other state's), which resulted in the national committees cutting their delegate counts for that year and implementing stricter rules about primary timing. Starting 2016, no state may hold primaries before February, and only Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada may actually hold primaries in that month. By convention, the Iowa caucus<ref>''Yet another'' wrinkle in the |
Every state has laws which regulate this practice but each law is written by the parties, so they can choose whatever they want. There is also sometimes tension between state and national party organizations about the process, because each state wants its primary to have as large an influence on the final selection as possible. In 2012, several states moved their primaries earlier in the season, to have greater sway in determining which candidates get "momentum" (starting with Florida, which kicked off a cascade of state parties shifting their primaries up -- including some which passed laws essentially stating that they would hold their primaries a week before any other state's), which resulted in the national committees cutting their delegate counts for that year and implementing stricter rules about primary timing. Starting 2016, no state may hold primaries before February, and only Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada may actually hold primaries in that month. By convention, the Iowa caucus<ref>''Yet another'' wrinkle in the system -- "primaries" or "primary elections" are just that, elections, but ''caucuses'' are events where activists and supporters of each candidate within various districts get together and discuss the candidates. It's not an election so much as a statewide series of conventions, in which attendees not only see who others are supporting but have multiple opportunities to convince them to change their minds.</ref> comes first, followed by the New Hampshire primary. |
||
For a more specific example, the Democratic Party had a primary election in 2008 to decide if [[Barack Obama]] or [[Hillary Clinton]] would be their candidate for President. One might think that the party would simply have all members vote for who they want and which ever one gets the most votes would win. This is not how it works. The leaders of the Democratic Party, who are not elected, can choose any method they want to decide who their candidate is. The current method involves having the vote of the members choose most of the "delegates" (who themselves are chosen by the party), while the remaining delegates are high ranking party members ("superdelegates"). Depending on state law and state party rules, the delegates who were voted for might or might not be required to support the candidate they were elected to,<ref>The logic behind this system is that the appointed "superdelegates" may be able to influence the nomination if a candidate does something monumentally stupid or embarrassing after the popular votes have been cast. Absent such an event, superdelegates generally vote with the national plurality.</ref> and even if a delegate is "bound" to vote for the winner of their state's primary, usually they become "unbound" if nobody has a majority of the delegates at the first vote of the convention. |
For a more specific example, the Democratic Party had a primary election in 2008 to decide if [[Barack Obama]] or [[Hillary Clinton]] would be their candidate for President. One might think that the party would simply have all members vote for who they want and which ever one gets the most votes would win. This is not how it works. The leaders of the Democratic Party, who are not elected, can choose any method they want to decide who their candidate is. The current method involves having the vote of the members choose most of the "delegates" (who themselves are chosen by the party), while the remaining delegates are high ranking party members ("superdelegates"). Depending on state law and state party rules, the delegates who were voted for might or might not be required to support the candidate they were elected to,<ref>The logic behind this system is that the appointed "superdelegates" may be able to influence the nomination if a candidate does something monumentally stupid or embarrassing after the popular votes have been cast. Absent such an event, superdelegates generally vote with the national plurality.</ref> and even if a delegate is "bound" to vote for the winner of their state's primary, usually they become "unbound" if nobody has a majority of the delegates at the first vote of the convention. |
||