Best examples elections and direct democracy US

Example showing limited participation during caucus stage for candidate selection

Turnout at the Iowa caucus in 2024 was 15%; based on 32 state primaries, 23% of registered voters engaged in the primary process in 2024

Jamaal Bowman (progressive Democrat) lost his primary for his House seat following the $15 million spend by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac) against him, due to his perceived anti-Israeli comments; it was the most expensive House of Representative primary in history, with $24.8 million spent

When the 2020 Iowa caucus opened, there were 11 major candidates still actively campaigning in the Democratic Primary

Example showing unrepresentative candidate selection due to disproportional demographics

Iowa in 2024 has 86% white people in the state, with only 4% black; in the US as a whole, the black population is 14%, with 75% white.

Example showing democratic candidate selection during primary due to high candidate support

Joe Biden won 87% of the popular votes cast in the Democratic primary in 2024, gaining 3,894 pledged delegates

On Super Tuesday in 2024, 16 states worth 36% of delegates (884/2429) voted in the Republican Primary – Trump won 758 delegates, with Haley gaining 46.

Example showing the primary candidate selection process to be undemocratic due to super delegates

2016 Hillary Clinton gained 571 super delegates in the Democratic primary, Sanders gained 45, which led her to gain 2842 delegates (need 2382 to win) – Sanders finished on 1865

Example showing significance of support for candidate during primary

Despite Michael Bloomberg spending $1.05 billion on his presidential campaign (Democrat candidate), he dropped out after a poor Super Tuesday performance in March 2020

Example showing increased representation during candidate selection (linked with super delegates)

In 2018 the Democratic National Convention barred super delegates from voting on the first ballot at the Democratic National Convention

Example challenging significance of primary to winning candidate selection

Despite not competing in any primary, Kamala Harris won 4567 delegates (97%) at the Democratic National Convention in 2024, due to the withdrawal of Joe Biden in July 2024

Example showing insignificance of incumbency to candidate selection for primary

Political outsiders such as Donald Trump (2016,2024) and Ben Carson (2016) were able to gain followings in the primary, with Trump winning the candidacy in 2016 with 1441 delegates

Example showing significance of primary performance to winning candidacy

Trump’s dominant performance in Iowa (51% vs 21% for DeSantis) in 2024 led to Vivek Ramaswamy dropping out; his endorsement of Trump added to his victory in the primaries overall – by January 22^nd 2024, there were only 2 candidates left in the Republican primary process (Nikki Haley)

Example showing undemocratic candidate selection due to lack of clear majority support

Despite winning only 44.9% of the popular vote in the primary, Donald Trump became the Republican Presidential candidate in 2016

Example showing significance of candidate endorsement during primaries

Trump gained the endorsement of 33 GOP Senators and 12 governors prior to the primary voting, with his nearest rival (Nikki Haley) receiving only 2 Senator endorsements in 2024

Example showing undemocratic candidate selection due to overrepresentation

In 2024, turnout for the over 65s was 43% in comparison to a 23% national average

Example showing undemocratic nature of electoral college due to faithless electors (1)

There are fears that the will of the 2016, 10 faithless electors, with 7 casting their vote for a candidate other than the winner in their state; John Kasich (Ohio governor) received an electoral college vote, as did Ron Paul (Republican Congressman) Bernie Sanders (Vermont Senator) and Faith Spotted Eagle (South Dakota)

Example challenging undemocratic nature of electoral college due to faithless electors (1)

In 2024 30% of the faithless electors had their votes invalidated for breaking state law.

Example showing undemocratic electoral college as leads to disproportional outcomes

In 1984, Ronald Reagan won just under 59% of the popular vote in comparison to Walter Mondale’s 41%, but gained 97% of the electoral college votes, as he beat Mondale in all but 1 state (Minnesota, and Washington DC), giving a sense of a larger victory in the popular vote than Reagan deserved.

Example showing electoral college leads to tyranny of majority (1)

The number of electors being related to, number of congressional representative; in turn determined by population, causes larger states to be favoured.

Example showing unrepresentative nature of electoral college (1)

5 times US history, the POTUS has lost the popular vote: 1824 (Jackson lost to Adams), 1876 (Tilden lost to Hayes), 1888 (Cleveland lost to Harrison), 2000 (Gore lost to Bush) and 2016 (Clinton lost to Trump). In 2000, Gore won the popular vote with 48.4% of the vote in comparison to Bush’s 47.9% but, due to his 537 vote victory in Florida (contested), he won all the 25 electoral college votes there, leading to winning the election with 271 electoral college votes.

Example challenging unrepresentative nature of electoral college (1)

Inconsistency of POTUS not winning the popular vote, 5/47 only 2x since 2000.

Example showing representative nature of electoral college and voting system due to political structure (1)

The Electoral college and the 2 party system means there is only 2 people to choose from, the likelihood is that person will gain over 50% of the popular vote, meaning that they do represent the will of the majority of the people. Since 1864, 30/40 POTUS won more than 50% ; Biden won 51% of the vote compared to Trump’s 46.8% in 2020.

Example showing unrepresentative nature of electoral college (2)

The vote of the smaller state as a whole is still marginalised. It is possible for a person to win 11 out of the 12 largest states with the most electoral college votes (such as California with 54, Texas with 40 and Florida with 30), and go on to win the Presidency without a single vote from any other state.

Example showing unrepresentative nature of electoral college due to disconnect from popular vote (3)

Despite the fact that H Ross Perot won 18.9% of the popular vote in 1992, he won 0 electoral college votes. The last time a third party candidate (the American Independent Party’s George Wallace) won an electoral college vote was in 1968, whereby he won 46, winning 5 of the Southern states.

Example showing electoral college prevents to tyranny of majority (1)

30 states have restrictions on faithless electors, allowing them to remove them if they try to cast their vote for someone other than the person who won the popular vote in the state. Moreover, it has never impacted on the outcome; in 2016, it meant that Trump won 304 votes rather than 306, with Clinton on 227 rather than 232

Example showing electoral college leds to tyranny of minority (1)

Overrepresentation of the smaller states could be argued as to have created inequalities in representation across the country. For instance, California has 1 electoral college vote per 712,000 people, in comparison to Wyoming which has 1 electoral college vote per 195,000.

Example showing significance of media in electoral outcomes via debates (1)

In the Carter vs Reagan debate 1980, the use of rhetorical questions by Reagan (‘are you better off than you were four years ago?’ gained him an 11 point bump in the polls, enabling him to win 43 states (he was 8 points behind in the polls prior to the debate)

Example showing insignificance of leadership in electoral outcomes as candidates goes on to win (1)

Despite Clinton’s dodging of the Vietnam draft, his affair with Gennifer Flowers and drug us (admitting smoking marijuana, but not inhaling), Clinton won the 1992 with 45 million votes (43%)

Example showing significance of media in electoral outcomes as impacts voting behaviour

Trump’s appearance on the Joe Rogan Podcast experience on 25^th October 2024, with an 81% male listenership, contributed to Trump winning male voters under the age of 30 backing Trump by 56% to 40% in comparison to Harris

Example showing significance of issues in electoral outcomes (1)

Bush’s approval rating plummeted to 46% in 1992 after the recession which left 7.8% of people unemployed - Clinton’s focus on the economy (advisor told his team the message ‘it’s the economy stupid’) emphasised his incompetence

Example showing significance of leadership in electoral outcomes (2)

George Bush was seen as untrustworthy in 1992 following his ‘read my lips: no new taxes’, then increasing the individual income tax rate from 28% to 31% in 1990

Example showing significance of leadership in electoral outcomes (3)

In a CBS Exit Poll 2024, 65% of people who thought that the ability to lead was most important voted for Trump, in comparison to only 34% for Harris – the failed assassination in Butler County on 13^th July 2024 (‘fight fight fight’) encouraged people to see him as a strong leader destined to lead the US (he won with evangelical Christians)

Example showing significance of issues in electoral outcomes (2)

With 55% of Americans believing that immigration was a critical threat’ to the US, Trump’s rhetoric (build that wall), managed to flip 4 counties on the US-Mexico border, such as Starr County, which had voted Democrat since the 1970s – Harris’ LGBTQ+ pro message, climate change and resisting restriction on abortion did not align with the white working class in 2024

Example showing significance of issues in electoral outcomes (3)

In 2024, Harris’ continued support for Bidenomics, despite the fact that 75% of Americans argued that the economy in the state, meant people trusted her less with the economy than Trump – 80% of people said the economy would be important to them making their decisions about who to vote for

Example showing insignificance of media in electoral outcomes

Trump dominated media in 2016, with 63% of cable news mentions – the revolution of his Access Hollywood recording of 2005 led to a 12 point drop in his favourability – however, he still won the election (although not the popular vote)

Example showing insignificance of money in electoral outcomes

Despite the fact that Kamala Harris raised about $1.65 billion against Trump’s $1.09 billion in 2024, she failed to win the election

Example showing insignificance of media in electoral outcomes

Despite widespread misinformation on social media (10 million migrants crossing the border), only 12% of people got their news on twitter regularly; however, Harris’ embrace of ‘brat summer’ and ‘coconut’ tree did gain 4.6 million followers, yet still lost in 2024

Example showing significance of issues in electoral outcomes

68% of people who voted for Barack Obama in 2008 claimed it was his position on the issues that swayed them - 73% of people said that healthcare was very important for their vote, with Obama’s interventionist ideas more appealing than McCain’s free market approach

Example showing significance of media in electoral outcomes

Bill Clinton’s appearance on the Arsenio Hall show, playing Heartbreak Hotel, made him seem like one of the people, particularly bolstering his ethnic minority vote-share

Example showing significance of money in electoral outcomes

In the month of September 2020, Biden outspent Trump in television advertising in swing states by $53 million to Trump’s $17 million (Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania); he went on to win all 3 states

Example showing insignificance of leadership in electoral outcomes

Despite Trump facing 4 criminal indictments on 34 felony counts, Trump won the popular vote in 2024 with 77.3 million votes (49.8%) – the day after his criminal conviction, he gained $100 million in donations

Example showing significance of race in voting behavior

The Democrats have been seen as the party championing BAME rights, being the party that signed the Civil Rights Act in 1968 – this has led to 95% African American voting for Obama in 2008 (although this reduced to 89% under Hilary Clinton)

Amongst voters who argued that economic concerns were the most significant for them, 59% ended up voting for Obama; 65% voters who were worried about being able to afford healthcare services back Obama, who had made this a key issue in his Presidential Campaign.

Example showing significance of region on voting behaviour (1)

Between 1984 until 2008, the Northeast gave the Democratic Party candidate his largest percentage of the vote, whilst the South has become solidly Republican, with Clinton winning only Virginia in the South in 2016.

Example showing significance of region on voting behaviour (2)

In 2016, Trump won towns and rural areas by 27 points (61-34) in comparison to 2012 (Romney, 50-48). His ideas of ‘Make America Great again’ and his focus on protectionism resonated with white, older, blue-collar workers, who felt that they have been neglected since the 2008 crisis. Illegal immigration, globalisation, bank bailouts has generated feelings of resentment in rural communities who feel they are carrying a financial burden.

Example showing significance of gender on voting behaviour (1)

In the 2016 election, Hilary Clinton received the largest differential between female and male voters (54% women, 41% men) – women have traditionally voted Democrat in 9/10 elections 1964-2000 (although still 41% of female voters voted for Trump in 2016). This could be linked to Democrat policies in favour of pro-choice, as well as their support the for Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution

Example showing significance of class on voting behaviour (1)

Poor and older white male voters voted significantly more for Trump than Clinton in 2016 (62% of white men, 71% of white non-college men) – this is based on the idea that they feel culturally marginalised, with their views on gay marriage, gender roles and gun laws ridiculed in the national media – feeling like a besieged minority, poor and older while male voters turned to someone who promoted their interests

The supporting of ideas such as increased government spending on infrastructure ($1 trillion) and opposition to free trade agreements, Trump’s policies were far from those of a traditional conservative candidate; however, still 90% of the Republican Party voted for him

Example showing significance of party on voting behaviour (1)

Political ideology and party affinity remains significant in the US; 89% of Democrats voted for both Obama and Clinton in 2008 and 2016, whereas 90% of Republicans voted for McCain and Trump. However, Obama received 20% of the Conservative vote in 2008, and Obama managed to win over 60% of the moderate vote as well.

For the 2016 election, the US turnout was 55.7% - in a poll by USA today in 2012, 37% of non-voters said that they didn’t vote as politics ‘did not make any difference’ in their lives.

Example showing insignificance of party on voting behaviour (1)

In 2016, Trump won states in what has been termed the ‘Blue Wall’ (Upper Midwest and industrial Northeast that were traditionally Democrat), based on his policies around protectionism for American industry, convincing blue-collar workers in industry that he will protect their interest.

Example showing significance of religion on voting behaviour (1)

Christians have become increasingly likely to vote Republican. An average of 61% of Catholics and Protestants voted Republican in 2024, in comparison to 37% voting Democrat. This is a significant change from 2008. with a 50% split between the same religious groups

Example showing significance of class on voting behaviour (2)

Those with high school degrees voted 62% Republican and 36% Democrat in 2024. This is significantly different to those with College degrees who voted 45% Republican and 53% Democrat. This is in part to do with difference in priorities between areas and incomes

Example showing democratic form of direct democracy

Referendums

These are where voters, rather than proposing an initiative themselves, get to approve or reject laws which have already been passed by their legislative bodies. For instance, In 2012, Maine Question 1 allowed voters to decide on whether a law passed by the legislature to legalise same-sex marriage should be upheld or not; it passed  by 52.6% of the vote.

The proliferation of initiatives relating to the legalisation of marijuana, with 25 states having had at least one ballot measure to reform legislation relating to the drug scheduled before 2022, demonstrates the ability of citizens in states to put measures on the ballot that they believe to be in their interest; for example, California’s proposition 64 legislating recreational marijuana was passed with 57% in favour.