Presidential Election 2016 Primaries - Super Tuesday Donald Trump has been the GOP's front-runner for much of the campaign season. He won the Nevada Republican caucus and primaries in both New Hampshire and South Carolina . Whether his victory is now inevitable , as some observers think, should become more obvious on Super Tuesday. The party's other contenders aren't giving up, though. Trump lost the Iowa Republican caucus to Cruz , who, along with Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, hit Trump hard at the GOP debate on February 25 . For Ben Carson and John Kasich, though, low poll numbers on Super Tuesday could signal the end. (Last week, Kasich even suggested that, "nobody's going to win but Trump.") For more information on which states each Republican candidate needs to carry to win the party's nomination, check out this graphic from The New York Times . Advertisement How about the Democrats? According to Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight , Bernie Sanders needs to win Colorado, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Vermont on Super Tuesday to clinch the Democratic presidential nomination. "Underperforming his targets on Super Tuesday would mean that Sanders would have to make up more ground later on with less time left on the clock," Silver says.

Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton won the South Carolina Democratic primary by a large margin. So if Silver's estimates hold true, Sanders needs to secure some major wins on Super Tuesday to stay in the race. What about the other states? There's a lot more left to this election season, with other primaries scattered throughout the remaining months. Kansas caucuses and Louisiana primaries, for example, will be held on March 5. Ten days later, voters in several states with large populations — Florida, Illinois, Missouri, North Carolina, and Ohio — will get their chance to pick their party's candidate. Even if you don't live in one of the states voting on Super Tuesday, the day's events could definitely foreshadow the choice you're likely to face at the ballot box in November. And as the list of Republican candidates narrows, get ready for even more intense debates as the election season rolls on. Advertisement 2016 Presidential Election 2016 Presidential Election “Democracy cannot succeed unless those who express their choice are prepared to choose wisely. The real safeguard of democracy, therefore, is education.” – Franklin D.

Roosevelt TABLE OF CONTENTS (Revised 9/1/16) (For info on the 2016 General Elections, visit Student News Daily’s General Elections page .) Presidential Primary Debates PARTY PLATFORMS: A National Platform is the official statement of a political party’s position on a wide variety of issues. Each issue included in the platform is a “plank.” Party platforms and their planks are very important to the electoral process: They give the candidates a clear political position with which they can campaign. They give voters a sense of what the candidates believe in, the issues they think are important, and how – if elected – they will address them. Both of the nation’s major political parties create platforms in advance of national elections so that voters have a clear view of the agenda the party will pursue if its members are elected to office. (A new Platform is adopted every four years by both the Democratic and Republican parties and is generally approved during the party’s national convention.) View all current and previous party platforms at The American Presidency Project. ACTIVITIES: 1. A preamble is an introductory and expressionary statement in a document that explains the document’s purpose and underlying philosophy. Read the Preamble to each party’s Platform.

( Democratic Preamble , Republican Preamble ) Based on the Preamble: How would you describe the main focus of each party? How would you describe the overall tone of each party? 2. How specific or detailed is each party on its positions regarding the issues? Complete the worksheet. Then answer a, b and c below. View the pdf worksheet. For each issue, explain if you believe the party was specific or vague in stating its position. Why do you think this is so? What role does each party believe the government should take? (What type of government action and/or legislation, if any, does each party support?) For these issues, which party’s position lines up with your own? Ask a parent the same question. 3. Based on each Platform, what issues do you think are most important to each party? (Economic, Social, Foreign policy, National Security…) Explain your answer. THE CANDIDATES Libertarian Gary Johnson – campaign page and youtube page Green Party Jill Stein – campaign page and youtube page ***NOTE TO STUDENTS*** To really understand the candidates’ proposals/plans for how they will address the issues important to America today, you need to listen to what they say, not what the news media and political analysts say about them.

Take some time to watch at least one speech by each candidate on a specific issue such as job creation or immigration. ABOUT THIRD PARTIES: The U.S. has a two-party system, which distinguishes American government from most other democracies. Most Western democracies, particularly those in Europe, have multiparty elections and parliaments, but the American government traditionally has had a two-party system. Since the Civil War the two parties have been the Republican Party and the Democratic Party. From time to time, third parties have gained traction with the electorate, most recently the Reform Party, led by Ross Perot, who won 19% of the popular vote in the 1992 presidential election. Third parties can sometimes push the major parties to consider their position on a specific issue (generally when they believe the party is not taking a strong enough stand, or is taking a moderate position on the issue). Few third-party candidates hold elected office at the state or national level. There are dozens of “third parties” in the U.S. including the Constitution Party (conservative), the Green Party (liberal) and the Libertarian Party (in general socially liberal, fiscally conservative). Read more at wikipedia .

THE CANDIDATES ON THE ISSUES – Some people vote for a candidate based on the person’s age, sex, race or religion. Some vote for a candidate because he/she is an interesting or dynamic speaker, is attractive, or looks like a leader. Before you are eligible to vote, decide that you will vote for a candidate based on his/her positions on the issues, and who you think will enact policies that are best for the country, not just you personally. (e.g. many college students say they will vote for the candidate who ensures they will not have huge student loan debt – would that be enough of a reason to elect a person president? Ask a parent.) ACTIVITIES: 1. According to a recent Pew Research Poll , three of the top issues important to voters include: the economy, healthcare and immigration. Visit the campaign website for each candidate and find the positions/issues page. Complete the charts on the candidates and the issues: Worksheet #1: Pew poll: issues most important to voters View the pdf worksheet. 2. What actions have each taken (if a member of Congress or governor) that supports or undermines his/her position on each issue?

(Visit govtrack.us to learn how current and former members of Congress have voted on any proposed legislation.) 3. Do you think a president must have prior political experience to lead the country? Do you think the experience businessman Donald Trump has leading major corporations qualifies him to lead the country (to be elected chief executive)? Explain your answers. Ask a parent: would this type of experience make you more or less likely to vote for a candidate whose positions on the issues lined up with yours? Explain your answer. 4. Consider the candidates’ positions from the charts. Which candidate most lines up with your views? Taxes – Compare the 2016 Presidential Candidates’ Tax Reform Proposals . CONSERVATIVE vs. LIBERAL BELIEFS: Check out StudentNewsDaily’s “ Conservative vs. Liberal Beliefs ” chart. [NOTE: This is a general overview of the conservative and liberal positions on the issues.] QUESTION: Read through the chart. For each issue, state which position best represents your beliefs and explain why. PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES The central focus of a debate should be to provide voters with information they need to measure the suitability of the candidates for office.

The Commission on Presidential Debates was established in 1987 by the Democratic and Republican Parties and has sponsored all presidential and vice presidential general election debates since 1988. Watch each debate. Pay attention to the questions the moderator asks. View the “Presidential Debate” pdf worksheet for the questions below: 1. List three questions asked by the moderator. 2. Which question do you think was the most important? Explain your choice. 3. For which question(s) did one or more candidates not give a direct answer, or not clearly answer the question? 4. A debate moderator’s role is to act as a neutral participant in a debate, to hold participants to time limits and to try to keep them from straying off the topic of the questions being raised in the debate. Do you think the moderator in this debate fulfilled this role? Explain your answer. 5. Do you think the questions chosen by the moderator helped viewers understand the candidates’ positions on foreign and domestic issues? Explain your answer. 6. Do you think the moderator’s questions were fair to every candidate? Explain your answer. The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) will sponsor the debates this fall.

The formats for the 90-minute debates are designed to facilitate in-depth discussion of the leading issues facing the nation. First presidential debate (September 26, 2016, Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY) The debate will be divided into six time segments of approximately 15 minutes each on major topics to be selected by the moderator and announced at least one week before the debate. The moderator will open each segment with a question, after which each candidate will have two minutes to respond. Candidates will then have an opportunity to respond to each other. The moderator will use the balance of the time in the segment for a deeper discussion of the topic. Vice presidential debate (October 4, 2016, Longwood University, Farmville, VA) The debate will be divided into nine time segments of approximately 10 minutes each. The moderator will ask an opening question, after which each candidate will have two minutes to respond. The moderator will use the balance of the time in the segment for a deeper discussion of the topic. Second presidential debate (October 9, 2016, Washington University in St. Louis, St.

Louis, MO) The second presidential debate will take the form of a town meeting, in which half of the questions will be posed directly by citizen participants and the other half will be posed by the moderator based on topics of broad public interest as reflected in social media and other sources. The candidates will have two minutes to respond and there will be an additional minute for the moderator to facilitate further discussion. The town meeting participants will be uncommitted voters selected by the Gallup Organization. Third presidential debate (October 19, 2016, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV) The format for the debate will be identical to the first presidential debate. All debates will be moderated by a single individual and will run from 9:00-10:30 p.m. Eastern Time without commercial breaks. As always, the moderators alone will select the questions to be asked, which are not known to the CPD or to the candidates. The moderators will have the ability both to extend the segments and to ensure that the candidates have equal speaking time. While the focus will properly be on the candidates, the moderator will regulate the conversation so that thoughtful and substantive exchanges occur.

The CPD is in discussion with technology and civic groups that will provide data to the moderators to assist them in identifying the subjects that are most important to the public. This year’s debates will build on the successful 2012 debate formats which introduced longer segments, allowing the candidates to focus on critical issues. “The CPD has a simple mission, to ensure that presidential debates help the public learn about the positions of the leading candidates for president and vice president,” CPD Co-Chairs Frank J. Fahrenkopf, Jr. and Michael D. McCurry said. “These formats will allow an in-depth exploration of the major topics in this year’s election.” [from Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) ] 2016 ELECTION MAPS, POLLS and EDITORIALS: The Veterans Scandal on Bernie Sanders’s Watch THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE: Electoral Votes: Each state has a certain number of electoral votes. The more people who live in your state, the more electoral votes your state gets. In 48 of the states, the candidate who gets the most votes gets all the electoral votes for that state.

Nebraska and Maine do not follow the winner-take-all rule – there could be a split of electoral votes among candidates through a proportional allocation of votes. The first candidate to win 270 electoral votes becomes the President. The Electoral College was established by the U.S. Constitution (Article II, Section 1, Clause 2). It specifies how many electors each state is entitled to have and that each state’s legislature decides how its electors are to be chosen. U.S. territories are not represented in the Electoral College. From WSJ : “This Electoral College was built into the U.S. Constitution because the country’s founders were skeptical about having elections determined by direct popular will and also wanted to ensure small states had a voice in national affairs.” The Electoral College is the institution that officially elects the President and Vice President of the United States every four years. The Electoral College consists of popularly elected representatives ( electors ) who formally elect the President and Vice President of the United States. The Electoral College is an example of an indirect election. The total number of U.S.

electoral votes is 538, which is the sum of the nation’s 435 Representatives, 100 Senators, and 3 electors given to the District of Columbia. (i.e. Each state gets one elector per member of Congress.) e.g. Alaska gets three electoral votes, because there are two senators and one representative in Congress from that state. California gets 55 electoral votes, because there are two senators and 53 representatives in Congress from that state. A candidate needs 270 electoral votes to win the presidency – it’s half of 538, plus one. A candidate who wins the majority of votes in a state gets all its electoral votes. The exceptions to this rule are Nebraska and Maine, where the state winner gets the two electoral votes derived from the two senators, while the candidate who wins each congressional district gets the electoral vote derived from that representative. Technically, the election of the president of the United States takes place during a joint session of Congress on January 6th following Election Day. That’s when members of the House and Senate meet in the House chamber to preside over the counting of electors’ votes.

The Twelfth Amendment mandates that the Congress assemble in joint session to count the electoral votes and declare the winners of the election. The session is ordinarily required to take place on January 6 in the calendar year immediately following the meetings of the presidential electors. Since the Twentieth Amendment, the newly elected House declares the winner of the election. In elections before 1936, the outgoing House counted the electoral votes. (from wikipedia ) How many Presidential candidates lost the popular vote but won the election by winning the electoral college vote? John Quincy Adams 1824 (elected by Congress) over Andrew Jackson Rutherford B Hayes 1876 (declared the Electoral College winner by an Electoral Commission) over Samuel J Tilden Benjamin Harrison 1888 won over Grover Cleveland George W. Bush 2000 (After disputed Florida electors were awarded to him by Supreme Court Ruling) over Al Gore. The final recount showed that Bush won. NOTE: Samuel Tilden actually won more than half of the popular vote. The others only won a plurality [more votes than the other candidate, but not more than half the votes].

(from wikianswers) SWING STATES: A swing state, also referred to as a battleground state (or purple state because it is not majority Democratic “Blue State” or Republican “Red State”) is a state in which no single candidate or party has overwhelming support in securing that state’s electoral college votes. Such states are targets of both major political parties in presidential elections, since winning these states is the best opportunity for a party to gain electoral votes. Non-swing states are sometimes called safe states, because one candidate has strong enough support that he or she can safely assume that he or she will win the state’s votes. (from wikipedia) For more on the electoral college visit the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. Visit the U.S. National Archives page “ Frequently Asked Questions ” regarding the Electoral College and electors. View a map of electoral college votes by state at: 270towin.com Take the “Electoral College Quiz” at: 270towin.com/quiz QUESTIONS: 1. How many electoral votes does your state have? 2. Why is your vote meaningful under the electoral college system?

CARTOONS: Read an article published just before Super Tuesday: “Voter Turnout Varies Drastically Between Parties” An excellent video “Primary Elections Explained” (produced by C. G. P. Grey and posted at YouTube here: C G P Grey –due to the fact that many school districts restrict access to YouTube, we include the full video below) CONVENTIONS (and Brokered Conventions): Following the primaries, party delegates officially choose the nominees at the national conventions held this year in July. The 2016 Democratic National Convention was held July 25–28, 2016, in Philadelphia, PA. (Visit the Democrats’ youtube page ) The 2016 Republican National Convention was held July 18–21, 2016 in Cleveland, OH. (Visit the Republican youtube page ) What is a contested or brokered convention? Read about it here: Some superdelegates vow to back Clinton even if Sanders wins NY primary (NOTE: The U.S. is a federal republic, so citizens do not directly elect the president and vice president.

Instead, delegates (and superdelegates) for each political party meet to vote on which people will become their party’s candidates. After the presidential election is held in November, electors in the Electoral College, acting as representatives of the citizens, cast their votes for president. See “The Electoral College” section for more info.) THE CANDIDATES: 2016 Presidential Candidates Republican Candidates: Jeb Bush , 63, Former Florida Governor (father George HW Bush served one term as President; brother George W Bush served two terms as President) , Gov. Bush announced his withdrawal from the race on Feb. 20 Jim Webb , 69, Former Virginia Senator – Sen. Webb announced his withdrawal from the race on October 21, 2015 QUESTIONS: 1. List 3 issues you believe are important to consider in this election. 2. Visit the campaign websites and YouTube pages for Democratic and Republican candidates for president to learn where they stand on the issues. (Click on the candidate’s name above or, do an internet search for: “name of candidate official website” “name of candidate youtube page” or “name of candidate Instagram”) What does each candidate say they would do to address each issue?

(What solutions does each candidate propose?) 3. What actions have each taken (if a member of Congress or governor) to support or undermine his/her position on each issue? (Visit govtrack.us to learn how current and former members of Congress have voted on any proposed legislation.) 4. Do you think a president must have prior political experience to run the country? Do you think the experience business leaders Carly Fiorina or Donald Trump have leading major corporations qualifies them for president? Explain your answers. Ask a parent: would this type of experience make you more or less likely to vote for a candidate whose positions on the issues lined up with yours? Explain your answer. 5. What do you think is the best way to improve the economy and reduce unemployment: Cut taxes? Cut government spending? Raise taxes on the wealthy? (if so, define wealthy) Raise taxes across the board? 6. How do you think the new president should deal with ISIS and Islamic terrorism? Which candidate most lines up with your view? Consider this: Some people vote for a candidate based on the person’s age, sex, race or religion. Some vote for a candidate because he/she is an interesting or dynamic speaker, is attractive, or looks like a leader.

Before you are eligible to vote, decide that you will vote for a candidate based on his/her positions on the issues. DON’T MISS IT! James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal has created the “bye-ku” – a haiku used to say ‘bye’ to a candidate as he or she exits the race. Read all of Mr. Taranto’s bye-kus here . PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY DEBATE DATES: The Republican Primary debate schedule is as follows: August 3, 2015 — prior to the first Republican primary debate, The New Hampshire Union Leader with C-SPAN and I Heart Radio sponsored a 2016 Republican Candidates “Voters First Forum.” Watch the forum at: c-span .

August 6, 2015 — aired on Fox News Channel , sponsored by Fox News and Facebook Moderators: Bret Baier, Megyn Kelly and Chris Wallace September 16, 2015 — aired on CNN and Salem Radio, sponsored by CNN, Reagan Library Foundation, Salem Media Group Moderators: Jake Tapper, Hugh Hewitt October 28, 2015 – CNBC; Moderators: CNBC’s Carl Quintanilla, Becky Quick and John Harwood November 10, 2015 – Fox Business/WSJ ; Moderators: Fox’s Neil Cavuto and Maria Bartiromo and WSJ Editor-in-Chief Gerard Baker December 15, 2015 – CNN/Salem Media Group Republican Debate held in Las Vegas, Nevada January 14, 2016 – Fox Business Network held in Iowa.

Moderators: Neil Cavuto and Maria Bartiromo January 28, 2016 – Fox News, Des Moines, Iowa; Moderators: Bret Baier, Megyn Kelly and Chris Wallace [Note: Donald Trump declined to participate in this debate, instead held his own rally to support veterans] February 6, 2016 – ABC News/IJReview Republican Debate held at St. Anselm College in Manchester, New Hampshire February 13, 2016 – CBS News Debate held in South Carolina February 25, 2016 – NBC/Telemundo/National Review Republican Debate held in Texas, now to be hosted by CNN (The National Review was disinvited by the RNC from co-hosting the debate over its extensive criticism of front-runner Donald Trump; NBC/Telemundo was disinvited over CNBC moderators’ treatment of candidates in the Oct.

28 debate) March 3, 2016 – Fox News Republican Debate, to be held in Detroit, Michigan March 10, 2016 – CNN/Salem Republican Debate held in Florida The Democratic Primary debate schedule is as follows (additional details will be posted when available): October 13, 2015 – CNN – Las Vegas, Nevada Sponsored by: CNN, Nevada Democratic Party, Moderator: Anderson Cooper November 14, 2015 – CBS News – Des Moines, Iowa; Sponsored by: CBS News, KCCI, the Des Moines Register, Moderator: John Dickerson December 19, 2015 – ABC News – Manchester, New Hampshire; Sponsored by: ABC News, WMUR January 17, 2016 – NBC News – Charleston, South Carolina; Sponsored by: NBC, Congressional Black Caucus Institute (Added on) January 25, 2016 – CNN Townhall discussion; Moderator: CNN’s Chris Cuomo February 4, 2016 – MSNBC – University of New Hampshire in Durham, NH; Moderators: Chuck Todd and Rachel Maddow (Added on) February 11, 2016 –

 PBS NewsHour debate in Milwaukee March 6, 2016 – CNN; Location: Flint, Michigan, Sponsors: TBD March 9, 2016 – Univision Debate, Sponsored by: Univision, The Washington Post; Location: Miami, Florida April 2016 – Date, location, sponsors to be determined May 2016 – Date, location, sponsors to be determined PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY DEBATES: The central focus of a debate should be to provide voters with information they need to measure the suitability of the candidates for office.

CHALLENGE: Watch a debate between the candidates. Pay attention to the questions the moderator asks. Fill in the attached “Presidential Primary Debate” chart for the questions below: 1. List the candidates who took part in this debate. 2. List three questions asked by the moderator(s). 3. Which question do you think was the most important? Explain your choice. 4. For which question(s) did one or more candidates not give a direct answer, or not clearly answer the question? 5. A debate moderator’s role is to act as a neutral participant in a debate, to hold participants to time limits and to try to keep them from straying off the topic of the questions being raised in the debate. Do you think the moderator(s) in this debate fulfilled this role? Explain your answer. 6. a) Do you think the questions chosen by the moderator(s) helped viewers understand the candidates’ positions on foreign and domestic issues? Explain your answer. b) Were the moderator’s questions fair to every candidate? Explain your answer. Get the App Speeches by Patricia L. Herbold | Singapore - Embassy of the United States Singapore - Embassy of the United States Speeches by Patricia L.

Herbold The 2008 U.S. Presidential Elections Remarks by Ambassador Patricia L. Herbold at the Singapore Academy of Law November 29, 2007 Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. It’s a real pleasure for me to join you today as part of the Singapore Academy of Law lecture series. I’m sure that many of you are aware that the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign began many months ago, and I thought it would be interesting to discuss what will be transpiring politically in the United States during the coming year. Let me set the stage with this opening remark: the 2008 election is the first U.S. presidential election since 1928 in which neither a sitting president nor vice president is running for election. This has led to one of the most wide-open campaign seasons in the past century. I’ll begin with a review of the structural process – both as it is delineated in the Constitution, as well as the radical revision of the political calendar this year. Then I’ll highlight some of the notable “firsts” of the coming election. I’ll conclude with a look at potential effects of the Internet on the 2008 campaign.

Even if I had a crystal ball, it would be foolish for me to try at this point to forecast the results of the election, but there are certainly a lot of new twists to this election cycle that will be fun to watch over the coming year. The Constitution and the Electoral College As some of you may know, America’s Founding Fathers did not write political parties, primaries, or conventions into the Constitution. Two hundred and thirty-one years ago, the trappings of today’s process – with campaign teams, media blitzes, flags and balloons and lots and lots of candidate mailings going to millions of households – would have been unimaginable to the framers of our Constitution. Of course, they wrote the document with quill on parchment, so I think we can all agree that times have changed just a little. A bit of historical background will help explain how we arrived at the system we use today. The U.S. Constitution puts the power of selecting the President in the hands of electors, not voters. The drafters devised the role of electors as part of their plan to share power between the states and the national government.

We don’t elect the president and vice president through a direct nation-wide vote, but rather by the combined results of 51 state elections (in this context, the term "state" includes the District of Columbia). The term “Electoral College” does not appear in the Constitution. Both Article II of the Constitution and the 12th Amendment refer to "electors," but not to the "Electoral College." The Founding Fathers appropriated the concept of electors from the Holy Roman Empire, where electors were princes of the various German states within the Empire. These princes had the right to participate in the election of the German king, who generally also wore the crown of emperor. In the early 1800's, the term "Electoral College" came into general usage as the unofficial designation for the group of citizens selected to cast votes for president and vice president, but the term wasn’t written into Federal law until 1845. The Founding Fathers included electors as one of their famous "checks and balances" for two reasons.

First, and most importantly, electors give states with small populations more of an equal weight in the presidential election, eliminating potential ‘tyranny of the majority.’ This is the same motivation that gives each state two seats in the U.S. Senate, whereas the number of members in the U.S. House of Representatives is linked to each state’s population. Second, at the time when the Constitution was written, most Americans knew little about government, politics, or presidential elections. Many were farmers, and a large number could not read or write, and thus wouldn't be able to read a ballot. The Founding Fathers thought that these "common men" – remember, women could not vote until the 19th Amendment was ratified in 1920 – wouldn't necessarily choose the best candidate for president. So, the system we know as the Electoral College was created. To win election, a candidate must receive a majority of Electoral College votes, currently a total of 270 votes out of 538. If no candidate receives a majority, the U.S. House of Representatives elects the president from among the three candidates who received the most electoral votes. This has happened twice.

In 1800, Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr each received 73 electoral votes, and incumbent President John Adams got 65 votes. The House of Representatives eventually, on the 36th ballot, chose Jefferson as president and Burr became vice-president. John Adams’ son later benefited by the same process. In 1824, John Quincy Adams received fewer electoral votes and fewer popular votes than Andrew Jackson, but won the election in the House of Representatives. Under the Federal system adopted in the Constitution, the nation-wide popular vote has no legal significance, though the winner of the national popular vote usually wins the electoral vote as well. But in addition to 1824, the popular and electoral results have differed in three presidential races: the Hayes/Tilden election of 1876, the Harrison/Cleveland election of 1888, and recently in the Bush/Gore election of 2000. However, within a state, each vote has a great deal of significance. The winner-take-all allocation of most states’ electoral votes is a significant factor in election campaigning and results.

The drafters of the Constitution did not detail any particular allocation of a state’s electoral votes; indeed, in the first presidential election just three states used a winner-take-all allocation. Currently all states except two use the winner-take-all method: both Nebraska and Maine award some of their electoral votes by congressional district results. The winner-take-all allocation means that the smallest margin of victory in one state can determine the election: for example, all 55 of California's electoral votes go to the winner even if the margin is a tenth of one percent. The states with the closest margins in presidential polling are called “battleground” or “swing” states, and their voters are heavily targeted by campaigns leading up to the November general election. In contrast, voters in states solidly in support of either the Republican or Democratic candidate often receive less attention from the national campaigns, which have limited incentive to spend resources to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or focus on the concerns of voters in these “safe” states. The Electoral College system is not universally acclaimed. Some polls show up to 70% of Americans would like to abolish the system.

The National Archives documents over 700 proposals that have been introduced in Congress over the past 200 years to reform or eliminate the Electoral College, including proposals for direct nation-wide election by the voters. But none of the proposals have been passed by Congress and sent to the states for ratification, as would be required to amend the Constitution. Several Constitutional amendments have expanded voting rights and changed the process of selecting electors, but the Electoral College remains. A new challenge to the Electoral College has recently appeared in some states. The Constitution gives states exclusive and complete power to allocate their electoral votes, and states may change their laws concerning the awarding of their electoral votes at any time. Under a plan called the “National Popular Vote” bill, all of a state’s electoral votes would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes, that is, enough electoral votes to elect the president. In April 2007, Maryland became the first state to enact the bill, and it has passed eleven state legislative chambers.

The bill isn’t universally acclaimed, however: in September, the California Assembly and Senate each passed the bill, and then Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed it. This was a blow to proponents, for California’s 55 electoral votes comprise 1/5 of the necessary 270 votes. Proponents of the National Popular Vote plan assert that it would ensure presidential elections are truly national, with each vote worth casting and worth courting by the candidates. With every vote equally important across the country, grassroots politics would be equally important everywhere, not just in the swing states. Though the plan will not affect the 2008 elections, you may well hear more about the National Popular Vote plan before the 2012 elections. Front-Loaded Primaries in 2008 Since the 1970’s, the primary system has dominated the process of selecting each party’s nominee. Traditionally, Iowa and New Hampshire hold the first presidential caucus and primary, in late January and early February of a presidential election year, with other states scheduling their polls in succeeding months, with most finished by June.

In 2008, the contests in Iowa and New Hampshire will take place ahead of the traditional schedule, in early January. Iowa is scheduled for January 3; New Hampshire is currently slated for January 8, although New Hampshire officials cite state law to suggest that they may move their primary forward, into the end of this year, if another state moves within a week of their primary – as Michigan did last week. So…stay tuned. But this year, the other states aren’t lining up to follow in an orderly fashion. Instead, states are leapfrogging each other to move their primaries earlier in the year, thereby giving their residents a more meaningful voice in the nominating process. Many Americans feel that the current system disadvantages voters in “late” primary states, while giving disproportionate influence in the selection of party nominees to Iowa and New Hampshire residents, who are not particularly reflective of the diversity of the U.S. population.

In an attempt to keep states reined in, the Democratic National Committee has pledged to strip all convention delegates from states that schedule their presidential primaries or caucuses before February 5, a day that is being called “Super-Duper Tuesday.” The committee has granted exceptions for Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada, and these ‘first four’ states have garnered promises from the top Democratic candidates not to campaign in ‘rogue’ states with earlier-than-approved primaries. Two states in particular will be interesting to watch: Michigan and Florida. Just last week, on November 21, in the case of Grebner vs. Michigan, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled 4-3 that Michigan’s January 15 primary will go forward, and Florida has scheduled its primary for January 29. Both states run the risk that their delegates will not be welcome at the Democratic National Convention, barring a compromise. The Republican National Committee has also declared it will sanction early states, but has not announced specific measures. Though Michigan and Florida could lose a significant number of Republican delegates, Republican candidates are still free to campaign in both states because they did not make a promise to the ‘first four’ states.

This could prove important in the general election campaign – when both states are critical to the electoral count – as Democratic contenders will lose more than four months of political activity in these states. It is clear that 2008 will have a front-loaded process, with more than half of the country going to the polls as of February 5th. Even at this late date, states are still angling to move their contests up on the calendar: just last week, Massachusetts joined the pack going to the polls on February 5th. Thirty-two states will conduct their caucuses and primaries by the first week in February; by comparison, only nine states had chosen nominees by the first Tuesday in February in 2004, our last presidential election year. It’s not a stretch to say that we will likely know both the Republican and Democratic nominees before Valentine’s Day next year, nine months before the general election. This tremendous time gap between the de-facto nomination and the general election is unprecedented. The Effects on the U.S. Election and the Candidates What does this front-loaded calendar mean for the U.S. election and the candidates? Well, it certainly changes the character of the race.

It helps well-known candidates, for whom it will be easiest to attract media attention, recruit campaign volunteers, and raise money. On the down side, the stacking of primaries will make it more difficult for candidates to meet voters in person, week after week, in town hall meetings and at stump speeches around the country. For the 2008 primaries, the candidates need to be many places at once, connecting with voters virtually when not in person. ‘Buzz’ about candidates will therefore play an outsized role in a compacted calendar. In the past, lesser-known – or “dark horse” – candidates have garnered attention and momentum by winning an early contest, such as Jimmy Carter in New Hampshire in 1976. But the clustering of so many contests early in 2008 definitely plays to the advantage of the front-runners by complicating efforts by lesser-known candidates to get noticed through a surprisingly strong showing in a single, early contest. The importance of raising money will be more critical than ever in a condensed primary campaign season, especially to buy advertising. The early need for funding gives front-runners another advantage over less well known candidates.

With the enhanced importance of name recognition and early fundraising, respected politicians of both parties bowed out of the race early, concluding that any realistic hope of winning was too remote to make it worth continuing. In a bit of a paradox, each party also has several candidates running ‘vanity campaigns’ with less than one percent support. The early debate platforms and associated media attention may provide incentive for several of these candidates to remain in the race – however nominally – longer than they might have in the past. Observers of the United States know that presidential politics are already influencing many aspects of our government, a year before the general election. As an optimist, I’ll note a potential benefit from the long primary and general election cycles: the added months of public scrutiny may encourage candidates to familiarize themselves with international policy and issues in greater detail during the campaign than has been the case in the past. Alternative Proposals for Primaries I’ve mentioned why each state may conclude that it would be in its best interest to conduct its caucus or primary as early in the process as possible. So what, if anything, will halt the momentum? Once this calendar migration began, most other states jumped on the bandwagon and none appear to be backing down, even with sanctions from their national parties.

Several alternative proposals are likely to draw attention after this election cycle concludes, and Congress will likely have to take the lead in implementing new rules. One proposal is the Delaware Plan, initially proposed in 2000 by a group of Republican officials led by Bill Brock, a former national party chairman and Tennessee senator. This plan mandates four sets of primaries, a month apart, beginning with twelve small states (including New Hampshire) and concluding with the largest states (which choose a majority of the delegates to the national conventions). A second proposal is the idea of a regional primary. Iowa and New Hampshire would still go first, but every two weeks thereafter all the states in a certain region would hold a primary or caucus on the same day. The order of the regions would rotate with each presidential election. There is an active debate in the United States whether such federal solutions are constitutional. The Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate the time, place, and manner of congressional elections. For presidential elections, on the other hand, the Constitution gives Congress the power to set the time for choosing presidential electors, but leaves the way in which electors are selected up to individual state legislatures. This cuts to the core of the debate over federal versus state rights.

Some argue that where the Constitution is silent regarding federal power, it is permissive regarding states’ powers, and thus the Congress would have no power to impose regional primaries on states. Others argue that Article II gives Congress the power to set a single national date for presidential elections, and that this power should extend to the timing for nominating presidential candidates as well. Both sides have ample precedent to cite to support their positions, and it will be interesting to watch the process evolve. 2008: A Year of Potential “Firsts” In the election of 2008, a long line of candidates are vying to become “firsts” in the White House – first as a U.S. president who is a woman (Hillary Clinton), an African-American (Barack Obama), an Hispanic (Bill Richardson), a Mormon (Mitt Romney), and a Jew (if Michael Bloomberg joins the race). If Bloomberg decides to run and wins the general election, he would also be the first independent president in the White House. Recent independent candidates Ross Perot and Ralph Nader both affected the overall results, but neither picked up a single electoral vote.

The 2008 election will see more voters under the age of 25 than previous elections, due to a boom in birth rate in the United States that began in 1989. This makes a large group of potential voters eligible to cast ballots for the first time in the 2008 elections. In the last presidential election, college-age voters drove the increase in voter turnout nationally, with the number of voters younger than 25 jumping eleven percent, compared with a four percent increase for voters 25 and older. These younger voters may prove decisive in the election results next year, and candidates will court their votes with techniques targeted to the online generation. In 2004, campaigns learned that reaching younger volunteers and voters – through new technologies and “Rock the Vote” type mainstream organizations – is less expensive than connecting with older voters through more traditional methods. The Role of the Internet and New Technologies in Recent Elections In terms of the mechanics of voting, you may remember the 2000 election, when a Supreme Court decision ended the contest in Florida which eventually decided the result.

Following that election, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act, providing funds for states to modernize voting systems and calling for minimum standards in elections administration. This is important since all U.S. elections, even presidential elections, are administered locally. Many states have already implemented these new standards, and more changes are expected for 2008. The past two U.S. election cycles, in 2004 and 2006, saw prominent advances in the use of the Internet and new technologies by campaigns. As candidates increasingly embrace technology, it has proven a double-edged sword for some. Two notable examples are Democrat Howard Dean and Republican George Allen. In the last presidential campaign in 2004, Howard Dean’s use of the Internet for fundraising, organizing, and building community among his supporters was considered pioneering, but his approach is now commonplace in campaigns. Dean, a relatively unknown Governor from Vermont, bypassed existing party and activist infrastructure and built his own online network of supporters, raising funds from across America. Initially, his presidential bid enjoyed tremendous ‘buzz,’ but he lacked synergy between his grassroots campaign and the party establishment. Dean had a ‘coffee shop strategy’ to visit grassroots activists in all 99 Iowa counties.

But he failed to turn technology into the ground troops and campaign infrastructure required to get voters to the caucus sites, and his bid for the presidency ended shortly thereafter. Technology has become even more central to political campaigns since the 2004 elections, as communication becomes faster and less structured. In 2006, technology played a significant role in giving the Democrats control of the U.S. Senate. Republican Senator George Allen ran for re-election in Virginia, with many speculating he would then enter the presidential race. At a campaign event, Allen was videotaped calling a volunteer of his Democratic opponent a “macaca.” The opponent’s campaign posted the footage on YouTube, a popular online site for user-generated videos. The video was viewed several hundred thousand times, and the effect was devastating to the Allen campaign. Democrat Jim Webb narrowly defeated Allen, and the Senate switched from Republican to Democratic control by a margin of a single seat. Technology Innovations for 2008 Looking ahead, the 2008 elections will surely feature new YouTube moments, and any one of these moments may change the prospects of a candidate. An off-the-cuff comment can become a voter-generated web video, available worldwide, in just moments.

YouTube also serves as an online echo chamber for structured elements of the electoral cycle; for example, relatively few folks are watching the party debates live, but tens of thousands of voters view notable quips and exchanges from the debates on the site’s special campaign channel, YouChoose ‘08. In addition, YouTube teamed up with CNN to host debates for both parties featuring questions posed to the candidates in video clips by ordinary Americans, rather than the traditional format of political commentators or news anchors posing the questions. The YouTube/CNN Democratic debate was held in July, and the Republican debate took place just a few hours ago - on Nov. 28th in the U.S. The advertising tag line for the debates – “This is your country, and your presidential debate” – emphasizes citizen participation, and the debates proved to be very popular. More than 210 million Americans use the Internet, and campaigns are eager to capture potential voters’ attention online. The Internet allows candidates to build name recognition, talk about the issues, and respond to attacks without the filter of mainstream media and with more substance than is permitted by a 30-second television ad. Perhaps most significantly, the Internet allows candidates to raise money through the “contribute” button placed prominently on almost every page.

But money raised online doesn’t necessarily translate into victory in the polls: John Kerry raised ten times as much money online as President Bush in 2004, and we know how that election turned out. Studies of how candidates are using their web sites shows that all 19 announced presidential candidates highlight issues and biography - rather than the tactical focus or comparison with other candidates which are common in traditional media coverage. Candidate web sites emphasize a two-way conversation with voters, and many offer the opportunity for users to become grassroots activists for the campaign. The social networking website ‘MySpace’ will hold the first virtual U.S. presidential primary on its site the first two days in January, ahead of even the caucus in Iowa and the primary in New Hampshire. Voting for America’s “first presidential primary winner” – in the words of the company – will be open only to members of MySpace. But consider: eighty-six percent of the 65 million U.S. residents who visit MySpace monthly are at least 18 years old – the legal voting age – and additional users will turn 18 before next November.

The relative influence of television advertising continues to decline as voters tune out the flood of political ads – or use digital video recorders such as TIVO to skip them altogether. As a result, campaigns are turning to new ways to reach specific groups of potential supporters with similar interests and ideas. For example, weblogs are rapidly rising in readership, supplementing traditional news sources. Recognizing the influence of this medium, campaigns are using weblogs more and more, especially to reach younger voters. Fifteen of the 19 candidate web sites feature weblogs, and seven offer users the chance to start their own. Similarly, with an estimated 85 percent of American college students using the online social network Facebook, students active in campaigns or issues use the “political views” category in the site’s profile section to generate “buzz” within virtual communities of potential supporters. Technology’s Effect on Grassroots Politics Grassroots politics in the United States has been an important part of my life for a long time. So when I look at the technology revolution, I wonder what effect the Internet, text messaging and podcasting will have on the political process as I have known it. Many of the effects are positive.

Technology expands the geographical base from which volunteers and donors can participate in a campaign. The new technologies also make recruiting, mobilizing, and retaining volunteers more efficient and cost-effective. Campaign signs on front lawns will probably survive for a while longer, but the digital revolution is transforming message delivery in American politics. For politicians and grassroots movements alike, the Internet and social software tools require users to surrender some control over the message, and those tools facilitate the dissemination of their opponents' messages as well as their own. This is a healthy phenomenon, but it does require advocates to remain alert to what is being said in cyberspace about their candidates or their issues. Sometimes there is more than monitoring involved: the online encyclopedia Wikipedia reports that Congressional staffers made so many changes to legislators’ entries – for example, rapidly deleting unfavorable information, even if it was accurate – that the site now limits edits from Capital Hill email addresses. The challenge for grassroots politics in America will be figuring out how to use the Internet to entice multi-tasked potential voters to linger on their message long enough to be persuaded.

After all, it’s a lot easier to click the delete button than it is to decline an invitation to stop by your neighbor’s house to meet-and-greet the candidate and enjoy a cookie or cup of coffee with your fellow neighbors. Conclusion In conclusion, the 2008 election will be exciting to watch, from timing to technology. The character of the election itself will be new because of the compressed primary calendar, but on the other hand, we’ll know the party nominees sooner. And it will still retain many familiar and classic elements of an election cycle. For the candidates, it’s still all about defining and getting out their message, and attracting dollars and voters. Candidates still must translate high-tech methods into good old-fashioned ground troops, contributions, and connection with the voters. The winner next November will likely be the candidate who best melds the new technology with the old techniques of campaigning. On that note, I am pleased to take your questions. This site is managed by the U.S. Department of State. External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

Question: What weekday is traditionally called 'Super...' in the election of US presidential candidates?
Answer: Tuesday