Presidential Nominations and Elections Profiling/Searching Chelsea Assing, Jessica Barta Lam, Jesse Levine-Spound, James Thomas
Presidential Nominations <ul><li>Presidential primary </li><ul><li>Chooses the candidates in each party </li></ul><li>National Conventions </li><ul><li>Where presidential / vice presidential candidates are chosen </li></ul><li>Key Note Address </li><ul><li>A speech given by a party leader to support the nomination of a certain candidate </li></ul></ul>
Presidential Nominations Continued <ul><li>Selection of Delegates </li><ul><li>Two campaigns of presidency </li><ul><li>Battle between Democrats vs. Republicans
Convention of Delegates </li></ul></ul><li>Federalism is reflected through the selection of delegates </li></ul>
Elections <ul><li>People do not vote directly for any presidential candidates. They vote to elect presidential electors in the Electoral College.
The Constitution states that a state has as many electors as it has members of Congress
Electors today are really just rubber stamps, meaning that they automatically vote for their party’s candidate
In every state the electors are chose by popular vote of the people </li></ul>
Elections Continued <ul><li>The electoral college votes are counted by the President of the Senate before a joint session of Congress
The candidate with the most electoral votes is declared President. The Constitution states that the candidate with the second most votes becomes the vice president. However, now Presidential candidates choose their own running mates during the elections </li></ul>
Elections Cont. <ul><li>The Electoral College system is plagued by 3 defects </li><ul><li>The winner of the popular vote is not guaranteed the presidency
Electors are not required to vote in accordance with the people of their state by whom they were elected
Any election might have to be decided in the House of Representatives </li></ul></ul>
Elections Cont. <ul><li>Many people have proposed the district plan. This is where 2 electors would be chosen by their state for each state and cast the votes in their election according to their state’s popular vote.
The proportional plan has also been proposed. With this plan, each presidential candidate would receive the same share of electoral votes in a state as he received in the state’s popular vote. This fixes the idea of winner takes all.
The most common proposal made, and the one that is most widely supported, is the direct popular election. This would get rid of the electoral college completely and provide for a direct popular vote of the people for president </li></ul>
Presidential Nominations Views on Profiling/Searching Rights <ul><li>Matt Snyder (Republican) -> Civil Liberty Support
Rick Santorum (Republican) -> Supports certain measures taken since 9/11 (opposed by most)
Ron Paul (Republican) -> Believes war on terror has nothing to do with civil rights
Newt Gingrich (Republican) -> considers ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) destructive to rights, believes rights come from God
Barack Obama (Democratic) -> Agrees with abundance of public surveillance, against hate/racial crimes and profiling </li></ul>
Presidential Nominations Views on Profiling/Searching Rights (cont.) <ul><li>Danny Woodring (Independent) -> Support of Constitution and Bill of Rights towards civil rights
Gary Johnson (Republican) -> Wants the government out of civil lives
Mitt Romney (Republican) -> Believes the US is to be equal to all except those who “preach terror”, and those people may be followed into a church or mosque and be dealt with by law.
Tom Miller (Republican) -> Defends Constitution & rights </li></ul>
Democratic and republican views on national security <ul><li>Republican Approach </li><ul><li>Republicans have pursued a closed and secret political system.
Most things in the republican political system is labeled top secret and if you were to leave the administration and “spill the beans” about what you former party were conspiring to do. You are then considered a threat to national security. </li></ul></ul>
Democratic and Republican views on national security <ul><ul><li>Republicans believe in a strong national defense and have a fundamental commitment of the federal government.
Historically republicans have always disapproved of interventionist foreign policy actions. An example of this..... republicans opposed Woodrow wilson's intervention in world war II and his attempt to create the league of nations.
Republicans have opposed the us involvement in somalia and the balkans a.k.a the Gulf War. </li></ul></ul>
Democratic and Republican views on national security <ul><li>Republicans also believe in aggressively eliminating threats. Which basically means.... see a threat? Eliminate it at all cost. This is a priority for al republicans. </li><ul><li>Republicans also believe in sacrificing liberties in order to maintain a strong sense of national security </li></ul></ul>
Democratic and Republican views on national security <ul><li>Democrats very much unlike republicans believe the national security starts in the United States
Democrats also have a tendency to oppose military involvement.
Democrats believe in maintaining security while at the same time respecting human rights.
Democrats generally favor in reducing or maintaining defense spending </li></ul>
Bibliography <ul>Presidential Nomination views on Profiling/Searching Rights – 2012.presidential-candidates.org Democratic and Republican views on national security – www.helium.com/items/19004402-differences-between-republican-and-democrats republicanuu.blogspot.com/2006/02/why-am-i-republican.html swampland.blogs.time.com/2007/06/12why_im_a_democrat/#ixzz0uq2nnaeg </ul>