The Case for the Electoral College

by Stephen Scuderi

Widener University Political Science Major, Class of 2012

The Electoral College should be retained. Many argue that a simple direct majority vote should take its place but that opinion is wrong. It is true that a direct vote would appear to be more democratic, but the Electoral College creates a safety net for equality. The Electoral College protects small states with low populations from being overlooked by Presidential candidates. If the election was a direct vote, campaigning and candidate favor would focus only on large metropolitan centers where a majority of population resides. Small population states such as in the Midwest could have their interests severely ignored. In relation to ensuring the interests of low population states are not ignored, the Electoral College promotes thorough coast to coast campaigning. To win the election, candidates must visit a majority of states and conduct a long drawn out campaign. This allows citizens to receive maximum exposure to the candidates and have ample time to decide who they want to support.

It may seem unrealistic, but the Electoral College system also prevents the election of a charismatic tyrant who gained the support of the ignorant masses. In that situation, the members of the Electoral College would know better and prevent such a travesty to occur.

The Electoral College & The Federalist Papers

by Mary Rohweder

Widener University Political Science Major

The Electoral College should be retained due the successful fulfillment of its original goal – creating a barrier in the event that the popular vote should cast a man unsuited for the role of President into office. The Electoral College exists, according to the Federalist Papers, in order to account for the opportunity of the tyranny of the majority or factions to select a President that may be unfit to hold office. The members of the Electoral College are entrusted with the responsibility of choosing the President and members are chosen by the people of the states per presidential election. Members are well-educated about the candidates as well as the American political structure, thus removing them from bias and ensuring that a president is chosen, according to Hamilton, “by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice.” General citizens are certainly well advanced in literacy and political knowledge since the days of the Federalist Party. However, the Electoral College rarely opposes the popular vote – but when it does, the opposition is executed in wise conscience based upon the Federalist’s intentions. The President has the capacity to leave a significant historical impact, even in the term of four years. A politician who is highly popular at the moment may not make the best candidate for the full term, and so the Electoral College considers such with greater reverence. The Electoral College serves as a successful method of checks and balances for voters during the Presidential election.

Presidential Elections & Good Leaders

by Mary Rohweder

Widener University Political Science Major

Our current system of elections is not designed to produce a great president. Some of the qualities that embody a great president do overlap with those that a successful candidate may possess. However, the purposes are strikingly different. In theory, a great president is a combination of multiple attributes. A president must be a strong public communicator, active, persuasive, politically skilled, and competent. Fred Greenstein believes that a president’s public communication skills are important in order to communicate with the American people. In addition, the best presidents are active, according to James David Barber. An active-positive president possesses qualities such as being adaptive, ambitious and pragmatic as well as wanting results, enjoying political activity as a challenge, possessing high energy and capacity for hard work, having high self-esteem and flexible goals, and employing presidential power for the collective good. Richard Neudstadt also believes that a great president possesses the power to persuade, which is important in maintaining positive relations with Congress. The power to persuade is also significant in calling upon the public to support a political policy or unifying the nation during a crisis. Greenstein also believes political skill is essential. A politically skilled president understands how to effectively interact with people, other politicians, and the media. A politically skilled president also expresses All-American values and demonstrates moral respectability in order to reflect the ideals of the public. Lastly, a great president exudes competency in his political agenda. A great president must express efficiency in domestic and foreign policy, and win a war if there is one ongoing. A president must also be able to maintain a good economy. The individual running for office must possess these qualities in order to be an effective leader, but the election system does not provide the opportunity for successfully expressing most of these qualities.

A political campaign in theory is necessary for democracy, as argued by Bruce Buchanan. He believes that political campaigns should be focused upon actual politics. He explains the three components of policy signals that should ideally empower political elections: first of all, the national priorities of the issues that deserve immediate government attention must be crystallized in a broad pre-election consensus. Secondly, the election itself must stand as a ratification of the national priorities established by the consensus and create policy momentum. Finally, the politicians must take action on the national priorities in post-election politics. In his electoral triangle diagram, he explains the accountability and roles of politicians, media, and citizens in creating an environment for effective political campaigns. Political candidates must explain their policies and qualifications for office to the citizens and respond to questions presented by the media. The media is responsible for emphasizing the policies and qualifications of politicians as well as investigating the truthfulness of their claims. The media informs and protects the citizens while candidates inspire and inform citizens. Citizens learn from both the media and politicians in order to eventually provide an educated vote.

In reality, a political campaign is not driven solely by politics. A candidate will act a certain way in order to be elected into office. A successful political candidate utilizes powerful public communication for advertising, public speaking, and delivering a campaign message. A candidate distributes advertisements in order to communicate a brief message to the public. The advertisements may be negative in nature if directed at the shortcomings of the other candidate. The president does not need to create advertisements in order to promote himself or to undermine his competition or opposition. A candidate must appear likeable and articulate when speaking directly to the people in order to win their votes. The president also aspires to achieve that same balance when communicating with the American people, although he seeks their support instead of their votes. A candidate will also need to deliver a campaign message. Candidates are often intentionally vague about the specific details of their political agenda in order to appeal to greater masses. At worst, a candidate can essentially do whatever it takes in order to win or may deviate from a political party or platform. A candidate may also create issue evasion and confusion, or only take a stance when the issue matters while appearing to choose the most popular stance. However, the president must be specific in order to pursue legislation for his agenda. Although both a candidate and a president must be effective public communicators, the means of communication vary between the two roles.

The campaign itself does not demonstrate a candidate’s political activeness, although a candidate can be evaluated based upon a previous political role. A political candidate does enact persuasion by mobilizing citizens to support the candidate in order to obtain enough votes to become elected into office. The president has already been elected into office and therefore does not need to mobilize voters. A president may be concerned about their approval rating – especially if he intends to seek a second term in office. However, a president’s approval rating depends upon the evaluation of his performance and activity in office instead of the public perception of him on the campaign trail. The president does require the ability to mobilize people, whether through Congress or the public, for enacting political policy while in office. This can backfire if a politician focuses on partisan mobilization and isolates the opposing political party. A successful candidate also conveys authority and persuasion in political debates. An effective president would prepare and deliver a strong stance on a debatable issue as well.

A candidate utilizes political skill in order to mobilize fellow politicians for public support and to engage in media relations. While a president still requires political skill, the purpose changes. A president uses political strategy in order to gain the support of Congress and of the public for enacting his political agenda and for keeping the country together. A candidate also navigates the mass media. A candidate must strive to receive positive press and enough news coverage in order to stay relevant. He may channel certain American values into the natural essence of his policies, but he is subject to any scandals that may threaten his moral appraisal. The president is not dependent upon the media and can be rather selective about which media outlets he engages in, although he cannot control the media’s formulated perception of him. While candidates must be politically skilled in order to survive elections, a president must be politically skilled in order to keep the nation intact.

Candidates cannot demonstrate political competency for the presidential office. A candidate may be judged upon previous political roles, but none will be truly comparable to that of the presidency. At best, a candidate may have served on a committee for foreign policy, but the accountability is dispersed amongst a group. Candidates often try to compensate by producing large promises for what they will achieve in the office, which usually demonstrates lacking in competency. However, a successful political campaign does fundraise large amounts of money in order to pay for campaign resources and expenses, such as traveling. While the president is also credited with or blamed by the respective success or failure of the economy, the president does not need to generate national income – nor does creating a balanced budget or national surplus parallel the method of campaign fundraising. The president does not need to shake people’s hands and ask them for money in order to fund the nation’s political agendas; taxes fulfill this role. A candidate cannot sufficiently demonstrate his potential competency in office, which can leave whether a president is successful or not to chance.

While some of the qualities needed to run a successful political campaign carry over to the presidency, they do not encompass the presidential purposes. Campaigns are designed as a political machine that has the potential to be highly controlled, whereas the office of the president is subjected to different demands and significant external forces. A great president communicates effectively with the public by achieving a balanced discourse of intelligent and approachable, which a candidate may also do. However, advertising and delivering vague campaign messages drive candidates’ public communication. A candidate cannot demonstrate activeness beyond his political history, even though a great president must be able to take action as necessary. Candidates use persuasion to mobilize voters and to perform in debates while the president employs persuasion for dealing with Congress and unifying the nation. Candidates utilize political skill for seeking the endorsement of other politicians and for media relations in order to survive and win the election. The president’s political skills encompass a larger scale of influence. A candidate often makes bold promises to fulfill in office, whereas a president demonstrates true competency through efficient political policy and a healthy economy. These disparities within the definition of public communication, activeness, persuasion, political skill, and competency result in an election model that cannot single-handedly produce good presidents.

Elections Produce Qualified Leaders

by Jon Perkins

Widener University Political Science Major

The current system of electing presidents in America produces good executives. A modern election properly tests the ability and character of a candidate. The system provides a large sweep through the candidates’ histories, finding any skeletons, and requires both major candidates to have a few qualities that are also needed to make a good president. There is some room for improvement in the system, mostly in the selection of party nominees.

The current election system is a long and drawn out affair. Starting the November before the election, the entire race lasts at least a year. This allows all the news organizations to have plenty of time taping and researching the several candidates that try the system. News channels get excited during national elections and scrutinize or adore each candidate, depending on their orientation. Though the news in America can be very biased, there are many news organizations. This allows people to get news from several sources and find the truth they want to hear. All the organizations will also jump on any candidate’s story if they find something that wouldn’t make a good president. Those candidates that are considered the front runners are always under the greatest scrutiny. Soon after Herman Cain became the presidential front runner, the news organizations quickly found out about his sexual abuse violations. John Edwards was to be the 2008 presidential nominee, until the National Inquirer found out about his mistress. Even the presidents elected are found to have a few stains, like Obama’s ties to his old, Black power preacher. The news organizations thoroughly vet every candidate and help remove candidates that would not have been good presidents.

By the time a major candidate receives their party’s nomination, they have shown several characteristics. Each candidate shows they have organizational coherence, message delivery, party unity, coalition expansion, and political renewal. Each of these qualities reflects the six Greenstein qualities that determine how successful a president will be. Organizational coherence shows how well the candidates can manage both their businesses and their party. The candidates have shown that they can properly run and profit from their original job. They also show that they can organize at least part of their party to help them get nominated. These reflect the organizational capacity of a person. Organizational capacity is how well a president can set up his staff and cabinet, which is like running a business or running a campaign team. It also reflects political skill, how well a president can gain supporters from the populace and the other politicians. The ability to organize a party’s politicians in their best interest shows that the candidate can deal with other politicians.

Message delivery is the candidate’s ability to effectively communicate a coherent set of ideas for governing. This is the same as effectiveness as a public communicator, which is how well a president can communicate to the country. It takes a candidate with at least decent speech ability to make it to the presidential nomination. Message delivery also shows vision, how well a president can make logical and workable plans and goals. A candidate must go on many debates, even before they receive their party’s nomination. There they give and explain what they want to do as a president.

The third quality needed to win the nomination is party unity. This shows that the candidate can rally most if not all of his/her party. It’s proven by the nominee winning the nomination. This quality reflects political skill. Party unity requires the candidate to find support in both the regular members of the party and the politicians that are also in the party. Party unity is the same thing as political skill, but at a smaller scale.

Collation expansion is the ability of the nominee to gain support from outside the party. Since all elections are decided by the moderate votes, this quality is important for election. The quality is also like political skill. It’s more like political skill than party unity, since the nominee has to show that he can gain support from the other members of the political community. It shows he can work with other side.

Political renewal is the party’s ability to field other politicians who will entice their supporters and show off future candidates for the nomination, especially if the current one fails. This can also help the nominee by giving him support by popular political figures in his/her party, and gives him/her a selection of helpful Vice Presidential running mates. This can show the nominee’s political skill, his/her ability to gain support from politicians and voters. Having the support of a popular politician can easily gain large amounts of his constituents to your ticket and your agenda.

When the final two candidates are chosen, both are good presidents since they both passed the tests of the primaries. Though both are good candidates, they don’t have to be the best one from the primaries. The selection of a nominee has to pass the two previous tests, but only past not excel. Then to win the candidates must slug it out with the money they can find. This allows people who can easily find or raise lots of money, Romney, to get ahead of people who may deserve the nomination more, Ron Paul. How elections are funded and unregulated allows not the best candidate, but the best money maker with the largest super PAC. This also comes with candidates having to get support from people or organizations that would have agendas different to a president’s. Campaign funding is something that needs to be changed to create better and fairer elections. Another way to create a better selection of nominees for the presidential election is to involve more Americans. A little more than half the people vote in the election and less in the primaries. Banning negative political ads and supporting another major party would help increase voter participation. Negative ads and actions by politicians are disliked by the general public and push them away from political participation. A third party, one that would be the more moderate of the three, would give people more choices in candidates, and would allow people who don’t side with the current parties to have a party that’s more suited to them. The current election system is good, but it could and should be improved.

Presidential elections are won on three things; President’s or previous president’s job approval rating in July, GDP growth in the first six months of the election year, and the number of consecutive terms a party has held the office. High approval, good economy, and having less than three consecutive years in the office will give the current holding party the advantage in the election. If you’re not liked and it’s a bad economy then you won’t be elected, and Americans like to switch up the office after a while. With only two choices, the people will either keep the team that’s doing well or switch it out for doing bad. Elections are also determined by the moderates, because the conservatives and the liberals will vote in their expected parties. Since both the left and right are about equal, the remaining middle picks their candidate. The current system maybe predictable, but it works, and the presidents it has given us have done their jobs. The current electoral system is good for picking good presidential candidates.

Romney’s Leadership Potential: Allow Strengths to Outweigh Weaknesses

by Craig Ricks

Widener University Class of 2012

Editor’s Note: In the following series of posts students will discuss Mitt Romney’s leadership qualities based on Fred Greenstein’s The Presidential Difference: Leadership Style from FDR to Barack Obama.

Mitt Romney is just months away from officially being announced as the Republican presidential nominee.  If he were to win the election in November, what type of president and how effective would he be?  Based on Fred I. Greenstein’s characteristics outlined in The Presidential Difference, Romney’s potential can be evaluated.

Greenstein’s first quality is a president’s public communication skills.  Romney is a very elegant public speaker, which he can use to his advantage.  He carries with him a spirited sense of confidence and seems to know what to say at any given moment.  To his disadvantage, however, is the fact that he often has trouble relating to people of the middle and lower classes.  If he can find a way to better relate to these members of society, he will have no weakness in the public arena.  The second key presidential quality is organizational capacity.  When the 2002 Winter Olympics were in jeopardy of being moved from Salt Lake City, Utah, Romney was appointed to take over control of the reigns.  Facing a steep budget deficit for the games, Romney managed to turn the program around.  He changed the leadership and policies of the organization, reduced the budget, and increased fund raising.  His ability to take a damaged program in jeopardy of relocation and turn it around perfectly displays his organizational capacity.

The third and fourth qualities for a successful leader are the president’s political skill and his ability to use that skill to achieve his vision.  While Romney is an above average political operator, as displayed by his ability to lobby Congress for funds for the 2002 Winter Olympics, he lacks a real vision.  Throughout his political career, Romney has flip-flopped on policies because it was the best political move.  If he had a true vision, he would stick to the same policy, but try to convince others that his ideas were for the betterment of everyone.  One example of Romney holding a contradictory position is with respect to universal health care.  As governor of Massachusetts, he set up a universal program for the state; he also opposed President Obama’s universal plan for the country.  His argument was that it was right for his state, but it is not the right move at the national level.

The fifth quality is the cognitive style of the president.  Romney is a very intelligent person, and should be able to use this to weigh any information and ideas given to him.  He displayed his superb cognitive abilities in handling the 2002 Winter Olympics situation.  Along with his organizational skills, this should prove to be Romney’s greatest strength.  The president’s emotional intelligence is Greenstein’s final quality to assess presidential leadership.  Romney appears to be below average in this category, however.  As mentioned previously, he has trouble communicating and relating to the middle and lower class, on both a fiscal and emotional level.

Like each of the president’s Greenstein studied, Romney displays strengths in some of these qualities and weaknesses in others.  If he can use his strengths to compensate in other areas he is lacking, he will be able to lead the country successfully, if he is elected.  However, if he allows his weaknesses to get the better of him, his possible presidency could be tarnished.

Mitt Romney Character Analysis

by John MacIntyre

Widener University Political Science Major

Editor’s Note: In the following series of posts students will discuss Mitt Romney’s leadership qualities based on Fred Greenstein’s The Presidential Difference: Leadership Style from FDR to Barack Obama.

Public Communication: As a public communicator Romney is adequate at expressing himself and debating others.  However, Romney is not able to communicate with younger generation and often comes across fake or insincere to his audience.  Romney is often criticized for his “stiffness” or “dorky” persona that turns many voters off from him.  This may be an unfair circumstance but a natural reaction to the human instincts of voters.

Organizational Capacity: Throughout his campaign Mitt Romney has proclaimed his success as a business man; which no one can argue.  Consequently, I would imagine that Romney possesses the skills necessary to organize an administration very effectively, and conduct task management to subordinates.

Political Skill: Once again I would imagine Mitt Romney possesses the necessary skills to develop a structured political organization within the executive branch.  Furthermore, Romney has managed many different situations within the business world.

Vision: One major downfall of Mitt Romney is that he flip-flops on issues in politics.  Romney has been severely criticized for taking the side on the more favorable side of the issue that will benefit him at the moment.  Romney like so many Presidents before him does not have a clear precise vision on what he wants his administration to accomplish in benefit of the American people. 

Cognitive Style: Romney is a very intelligent person and a morally upstanding person with a family and a strong religious background.  That being said Romney is considered to be out of touch with two major communities in the voting world: the working class, and the poor.  Romney often makes analogies to his life style as a wealthy man that comes across to the poor communities which affects his message.

Emotional intelligence: Many Presidents are chastised for their letting their emotions get the best of them.  Romney on the other hand is lack luster in the emotional department.  A tip for Romney would be to have some fire in his belly and create some controversy about his emotions for American politics rather than the constant gaffes he has been well known for in recent news.