There is an ongoing debate regarding the best way to elect the next president of the United States of America. For more than two hundred years, Americans elected presidents through the Electoral College system. Due to the problems the Electoral College system created during the 2000 presidential elections, people are clamoring to abolish or reform the said system. A significant number of American citizens are aggressively campaigning to replace the Electoral College. They propose to elect presidents through the direct-election method.
Democratic governments all over the world elect their president through the popular vote. Although direct-election is less complicated, there are three major reasons why Americans should retain the Electoral College system. America should retain the Electoral College system because of the following reasons: 1) it compels a winning presidential candidate to build a national coalition from many states; 2) it amplifies and exaggerates the margin of victory, producing decisive results; and 3) it gives smaller states protection against domination by the more populous states.
The U.S. is composed of several states. There are a number of states that have massive populations. In a direct election system, the presidential candidate that garnered the most votes wins the race. Logic dictates that under this new system, presidential candidates should focus their attention on areas that guarantee the most number of votes. The Electoral College system prevents this from happening. The end goal is not to amass the most number of votes, but to win the most number of electoral votes. Thus, presidential candidates are compelled to work with different leaders across the country.
They are forced to create national coalitions, and if they get elected, it becomes the foundation for governing the country (The CQ Researcher 970). Judith Best, professor at the State University of New York, made a compelling argument when she said, “Elections, especially presidential elections, are designed not just to voice opinions” (The CQ Researcher 980). One of the major purposes of presidential elections is to select a leader that knows how to persuade people to work together.
Another important consideration is the influence of populous states like California and Texas in crafting national policies. Under a direct-election system, representatives and lobbyists from these states force incumbent leaders to accede to their demands. They possess this power because they can deliver the winning votes in the upcoming elections. The framers of the U.S. Constitution saw the imbalance of power in the event of mass migrations to a particular state or region.
This means that at any given point in time, there are territories that have fewer people. However, due to the principles inherent in the Electoral College system, presidential candidates are prevented from neglecting smaller states. The current system prevents the crafting of political deals from favoring more populous states. Without the safeguards that are embedded in the Electoral College System, there are no incentives to create policies helping smaller states.
Another important issue to consider is the need for decisive victories. Americans have taken for granted the relative speed of declaring the winner of presidential elections. Critics of the Electoral College system must find time to study how elections are conducted in other parts of the world. If they examine the aftermath of elections in countries like Pakistan, India, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh, they will discover a selection process that takes weeks or even months to resolve.
Walter Berns, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, pointed out the impact of the current system when he said, “By amplifying the popular vote margin of victory, the Electoral College also gives us a clear and immediately known winner with a legitimate claim for the presidency” (The CQ Researcher 981). The key phrase here is the need for a legitimate claim for the presidency. In an Electoral College system, disputes are uncommon because of the winner-take-all principle.
Conclusion
There is no compelling reason to abolish the Electoral College System, in order to replace it with the direct-election method of selecting the next president of the United States. The Electoral College System enables Americans to understand that there are other things to consider in electing presidents. First, there is a need to elect a leader that knows how to govern a nation. This is demonstrated by the creation of an effective national coalition during the course of the campaign period. Second, there is a need to compel national leaders to look into the problems faced by smaller states.
Third, there is a need to determine a clear winner in the shortest time possible. The direct-election method does not encourage the creation of national coalitions because presidential candidates will focus only on areas that have the most number of registered voters. Thus, populous states like California and Texas will dominate states that do not have enough voters to influence the outcome of a national election. Finally, the direct-election type of selecting leaders is prone to disputes and recounts. The United States cannot afford a presidential race that is unable to produce a decisive winner.
The 2020 US Presidential Election will be one of the significant events in US political practice and the history of the present century. The author of this paper chose the recent debate between Trump and Biden as a research object because it was the first open ideological confrontation between them. Such research through the Society of the Spectacle methodology is necessary to gain an objective perception of the current reality and the present illusion created by the media. This paper aims to explain the framed spectacle by analyzing three media sources, namely CNN, Fox News, and Euronews.
CNN Article Perspectives Analysis
Spectacle as Information
It can be said that analysis by Stephen Collinson of the presidential debate between Trump and Biden may be perceived as information. The analyst describes the main points of their discussion, gives them critical assessments, and provides readers with political predictions. It means that this article informs readers, primarily supporters of the Democratic Party, about reality. It is because they are the ones who perceive this spectacle as a source that tells them about their candidate, the past event, and confirms their presuppositions about the electoral opponent party in general and President Trump in particular (Collinson, 2020). Republican Party supporters may regard the information provided as an illusion or unfounded criticism.
Spectacle as Propaganda
It is safe to say that this CNN article can be considered and perceived as propaganda. Collinson boldly states (2020), “but there was only one candidate to blame for that” (para. 8). It is seen that CNN media source chose the Democratic Party’s side in reality in general and in the electoral race in particular. Therefore, this spectacle forms the illusion of the Democratic Party’s superiority and their principles, thereby creating a reality for both groups of voters in which the Democratic Party dominates the political and social fields.
Spectacle as Advertisement
The spectacle framed by CNN is also an advertisement because it promotes three things, namely the Democratic Party, CNN, and the vote. Collinson (2020) criticizes Trump much more often and harsher than Biden and frequently cites the latter. The media source creates both the illusion and the reality in which the Democratic candidate is a preferable one. Collinson (2020) also advertises the media platform under discussion, providing readers with CNN expert opinions and CNN resource statistics. At the end of the article, the author urges all those who read the news article to vote because every vote determines what political vector social praxis will have for the next four years.
Spectacle as Object of Direct Entertainment Consumption
Collinson’s article is also an object to direct entertainment consumption. It is obvious that the politics-aimed item is of interest to a large group of people, especially political analysts, experts, and reviewers. It can be assumed that this article is more entertaining for Democratic supporters than for GOP adherents because it may cause discomfort to the latter (Collinson, 2020). The spectacle creates an environment where the Democratic Party principles’ dominance is more entertaining and, therefore, more preferable and plausible.
Fox News Article Perspectives Analysis
Spectacle as Information
Halon’s Fox News article, which is spectacular, may be perceived in the form of information. It is because the author of the article describes and comments on the performance, behavior, and arguments of the debaters. According to Halon (2020), “Biden and President Trump sparred over virtually every topic presented by moderator” (para. 4). This article would be equally informative for GOP and Democratic supporters, as well as for neutral voters. Although it is noticeable that the mentioned politics experts and the author are loyal to Trump, nevertheless, the framed spectacle forms such a reality where it is still unclear who won the debate and who would win the election.
Spectacle as Propaganda
Just like the previously reviewed political news article, the Fox News article is also propaganda at its core. As noted above, the author of this work sees that Halon is leaning towards Trump and the Republican Party’s principles. According to Halon (2020), “for Trump’s part, Perino said that although the president “had some great lines…” (para. 5). It is also worth noting that the Fox News article is less biased than Collinson’s CNN one.
Spectacle as Advertisement
Fox News article under review is also an advertisement. The report promotes Fox News because this article is a product of this media platform and political experts by quoting them. Halon (2020) notes that “according to “The Daily Briefing” host, Biden “had more to lose than Trump had to gain,” but was still able to clear the “very low bar that had been set for him” (para. 2). It can be assumed that this media source creates such an environment where only Fox News is perceived as impartial and objective. It also encourages readers to listen and trust the opinions of Fox News experts.
Spectacle as Object of Direct Entertainment Consumption
Fox News’ article on the Biden-Trump debate results is of interest to many people interested in the topics of politics. It means that this spectacle is an object of direct entertainment consumption. The author of this paper believes that the article by Halon (2020) is aimed at a more politically erudite audience as it presents the detailed opinion of political experts, namely Perino and Hume. It is because the author implies in advance that the intended audience is aware of the political views of the cited individuals. It creates such an illusion, and reality, in which GOP representatives and supporters are more educated in political science than their opponents.
Euronews Article Perspectives Analysis
Spectacle as Information
As well as CNN does, Euronews media source provided readers with an article on highlights from Biden and Trump’s past debate. This spectacle can be perceived as a source of pure information. Euronews’ information is considered pure because it is politically neutral and unbiased compared to CNN and Fox News articles. It is due to Euronews being outside the scope of the United States’ political influence (Euronews, 2020). Such a condition creates a reality in which readers are neutral and abstracted from the United States’ political situation that making them see both candidates as equal rivals.
Spectacle as Propaganda
The propaganda is the only perspective that is missing in the Euronews article. It is due to the fact that, as was noted in the previous paragraph, the Euronews article is politically neutral, and the authors are unbiased (Euronews, 2020). It is why the author of this paper believes that the spectacle framed by Euronews media source is not propaganda. Moreover, it cannot become or be perceived as propaganda in reality because Euronews is not part of the US political reality or the US media sphere.
Spectacle as Advertisement
The spectacle framed in the news article by Euronews will serve as an advertisement, just as the previous two do. The authors advertise their media source and the 2020 US election, urging their audience to follow and discuss current political events. The news article creates a reality in which residents of other countries are considered as United States citizens. According to Euronews (2020), “Trump is no stranger to going on the offensive…” (para. 4). It builds an illusion that everyone can influence the results of the election.
Spectacle as Object of Direct Entertainment Consumption
Euronews news article can be viewed as well as perceived as an object of direct entertainment consumption. In contrast to the two previous items, the provided direct entertainment is aimed at a neutral and unbiased audience, namely outside observers who are supposedly citizens of the European Union (Euronews, 2020). It builds such an illusion and reality where a citizen of any state can enjoy watching the upcoming Biden-Trump debates and the 2020 US Election as a whole.
Conclusion
This paper analyzes three news articles related to the past debate between Trump and Biden, provided by three different media sources, to explain the present spectacle of reality and illusion. The author of this work has chosen such media sources as CNN, Fox News, and Euronews. It is because these media sources show opposite political views, each of which in some way framed the spectacle of the 2020 US election. Such perspectives of each of the three articles were analyzed and explained as information, propaganda, advertising, and direct entertainment consumption.
References
Collinson, S. (2020). Trump has no answers on America’s crisis — his debate rage made it worse. CNN Politics. Web.
Euronews. (2020). Trump-Biden presidential debate: Five key takeaways. Euronews. Web.
Halon, Y. (2020). Dana Perino’s debate verdict: ‘Biden cleared the very low bar that had been set for him.’ Fox News. Web.
Definition of a ‘constitution’, discussion of what relationship does the constitution have with other laws in society – those that are legislated, implemented, and adjudicated
A constitution is a set of rules that are the used as the supreme law in a political entity such as a country. It can be either written or unwritten. Most countries in the world today have written constitutions. The relationship between the constitution and other laws that are legislated, implemented, and adjudicated is that these laws are not relevant if they are inconsistent with the constitution. Constitutions can be either rigid or flexible. A rigid constitution does not provide easily maneuverable ways of amending it. Flexible constitutions are clear and straight forward in what needs to be done to amend laws as a way of making the law relevant as far as the realities of the life of the state are concerned. In flexible constitutions, the means of amendment are not difficult to deal with.
The underlying tenets of modern constitutionalism and how these tenets are reflected in the Canadian Constitution. The major implications of these doctrines for changing the Canadian Constitution
Modern constitutionalism is based on the principle of universal principles, the independence of the judiciary, the separation of powers, the power and freedom of the people otherwise referred to as the sovereignty of the people, and the power of the people to amend their law or the constitution. Other tenets include the right of the people to form a government of their liking or choice, the principle of limited government and the tenet of accountability of the part of the government. All these tenets are reflected in the Canadian constitution through the various provisions that appear in the constitution. For example the Constitution Act of 1982 incorporated the Freedoms Charter which gives the people their basic freedoms such the freedom to worship, own businesses, travel, be treated fairly under the law and own property. Through these provisions, the government is kept in check as far as private or individual lives are concerned. Other provisions in the Canadian constitution give a clear guideline on how the people are supposed to amend the constitution, and vote in elections to elect their leaders (Cheffins & Johnson 78).
The tenet of the power of the people to amend the constitution has a serious but important implication in amending or changing the Canadian constitution because of the rigorous processes that are required in its amendment. For example one possibility requires the assent of both the House of Commons as well as the senate while the other requires an okay from at least seven provincial points with one of the two populous areas. The two populous areas are Quebec and Ontario. This is a lengthy and difficulty process that making amending the Canadian constitution a political process that will call for not only patience but expertise in the law and dealing with people in the political process. But the most important political point is that it has a means through which the people can carry out amendments of areas that they do not like.
The other tenet of freedoms for the people has an implication in changing the Canadian constitution in that the people are fully empowered by this section that gives them freedoms and rights. Therefore anyone who may want to amend the constitution with the aim of withdrawing these rights and freedoms will meet great opposition from the people. The implication on constitutional change here is that it makes it very difficult to change the constitution. The people are willing to support reforms when the constitution does not serve them in a democratic and fair manner. But when it is protecting their inalienable rights, they cannot support anybody who may attempt to change it.
Discussion of the doctrine of limited government. Provisions in Canada’s Constitution limit the powers of government against individual citizens and whether these limitations are meaningful
The doctrine of limited government means that the government of the people for the people by the people is supposed to operate in a manner that is not intrusive into the private lives of the citizens. The aim here is to let the citizens lead their lives with little guidance from the government. The government is supposed to be concerned with the overarching issues such as security and the provision of crucial services. Therefore when the government gets deep into the lives of the people and begins to legislate on people private matters, the doctrine of private government is under attack.
In Canada’s constitution, there are provisions whose purpose is to ensure that the government does not become too big to the extent that it begins interfering with the lives of the citizens. The best example of these provisions is what is popularly known as the Freedoms Charter. This important section of the Canadian constitution was enacted in 1982 under the constitution Act of 1982.What this charter does is that it gives the citizens a number of freedoms and rights which are not supposed to be taken away from the people by anyone. Not even the government can abuse these freedoms and rights that the charter gives to the people unless there is sufficient reason that someone has been involved in an act that warrants the withdrawal of their rights and freedoms. Other provisions that support the doctrine of limited government include the legal redress that the individual has the ability to seek against the state in the event that he or she feels that his or her rights and freedoms have been interfered with.
The meaningfulness of these provisions cannot be overemphasized. It is possible that once in a while or in a number of years, credible leaders who respect the rule of law can rise to power and lead the people in the expected way. But the chances of someone with bad intentions rising to power are equally high. If such a person rises to power, it is possible that he is she is going to abuse his or her powers by interfering with the lives of the people. The best way to ensure that the rights of the people are preserved and protected is by including solid provisions in the constitution. This is what makes the provisions on limited government meaningful.
Discussion of the rights and freedoms Canadians enjoy. What protections are missing in our Constitution and how could these omissions affect you as an individual and what additional rights would make the ideal constitution
The Canadian people enjoy rights and freedoms such as the freedom of religion, the freedom of mobility and the freedom of expression. Under the freedom of religion, the citizens of Canada are given the freedom to worship in any form they want. The only requirement is that they should not injure of affect the lives of others in the process of practicing their freedom of religion. The freedom of mobility on the other hand allows the Canadian citizens to live or tour any part of the country without the fear of being harassed by the people who live in the places where the visitor has decided to tour. The other freedom that the Canadian people are guaranteed by their constitution is the freedom of expression. This right is important especially in the field of democracy whereby the country will always be criticized by individual members of the society of members of civil society organizations if it carries out some actions that do not augur well with the citizens. Some leaders may not accept the criticisms from the people and therefore he or she may move forward to silence them. But given that the constitution has allowed the people the right to express themselves without fear; it is not possible to get a leader of the government harassing the citizens for speaking out against the government of the day. Other rights and freedoms include the freedom of assembly, the right to life, liberty and security, the right to take part in voting, the right to be given a lawyer to represent you in court matters if arrested and the right to be given the services of an interpreter in court if need arises.
The Canadian constitution however has a comprehensive set of freedoms and rights to the extent that it is not easy to think of what is missing. But a keen look at the numerous provisions reveals that the people are not given the power to demand for services from the government as a right since they are the ones who pay taxes. Another right that is not in the Crater is that of saying no to unnecessary taxation. At personal level, the right to demand services from the government is supposed to mobilize the rest of the people so as to pressure the government into providing services when it does not do that. But its absence means that the individual cannot do that. The other absent freedom which is the freedom from unnecessary taxation means that the individual will have no alternative other than to pay his or her taxes even when they are unnecessary. There is a possibility that the freedom from unfair treatment is meant to be broad enough to include the freedom from unfair taxation but this leaves the door open to wrong or narrow interpretation and the subsequent abuse.
The rights and freedoms that need to be added to the Canadian constitution so as to make it better are the freedom from unnecessary taxes and the right to demand quality goods and services since the government is there to use the taxes it collects to meet the national needs of the people.
Discussion of whether the federal principle is incorporated in the Constitution Act, 1867, destined to undergo major amendment by Canadians in the future
The federal principle that is incorporated in the Constitution Act of 1867 is destined to undergo amendment in the future. When this happens, controversy will rise over some areas. These include the powers of the federal governments, the distribution of power and the number of representatives in the regional assemblies.
Political Parties, Interests and Pressure Groups
Democracy would not be possible in contemporary societies without political parties. Discussion of these institutions and how, through them, a public is able to gain access to the governing elite, hold them accountable, and influence public policies
Political parties are entities that are formed by politicians for the purpose of selling a particular political agenda such as a system of administration or government to the people with the aim of being elected to lead the area of interest (Michels 34-36). The area of interest may be the entire country or a state or a constituency. The proposals that a political party sells to the people can be termed as the ideology of the party. The special book or compilation that contains the ideology of a given political party can be described as a manifesto. The modern world has political parties that are scattered along the political spectrum from the left to the right. Most conservative parties are to the right while the liberal parties are to the left. It is largely believed that parties that tend to include socialist ideals are supposed to be on the left while the parties that have strong capitalist credentials are to the right of the political spectrum. Other parties have a mixture of the two sets of ideologies and cannot be placed at the far right or far left of the political spectrum. They are therefore placed at the center.
The citizens of countries around the world are always given the chance to join one of the many options of political parties that are available. The choice is mainly based on the party that has the best manifesto. A good manifesto is also relative because people do not want the same thing. One party may be advocating for liberal market policy while another party may be advocating for protectionist market principles. The citizen who is in favor of open markets will consider the manifesto of the party that is pushing for liberalism in markets as the best while the citizen who wants protectionism will support the party with protectionist ideas.
By offering the people all these varieties of ideas, the political parties are able to stir interest in the citizens as far as the political process is concerned and during elections, the party officials from the various parties always mobilize voters as a way of ensuring that the people have a chance of voting the leaders from their parties. At the end of the day, the parties attain the dream of having a following while democracy benefits through the massive participation of citizens in an election process. This is definitely the joy of any genuine democracy in the world.
Comparison of the roles of political parties in democratic and non-democratic states, discussion of the various functions of political parties with particular reference to how they recruit political leaders, socialize the masses, and aggregate political interests in a society
Political parties have a very important role to play in both democratic and non democratic states. In democratic states, political parties are vehicles through which the people can elect their leaders and get their agenda accomplished. They are also avenues through which the people are continually educated so as to know the latest occurrences in the political process. Political parties in democracies also act as training grounds for leaders. This is because as one tries to rise in leadership to a particular position in the region or state or country in question, it is likely that he or she will be required to make this climb though a party. Occupying a position in the party provides a unique opportunity to experience the art of decision making as well as leading other people.
Political parties also assist in forming the government in democratic societies. When the government in power is not elected, the opposition political party emerges victorious and forms the next government. The rotation continues depending on which party wins the elections. Therefore political parties in democratic societies have the function of governing after being given the powers to do so by the people through elections.
In non-democratic societies or authoritarian societies, political parties have numerous functions too. First, political parties act as mobilization vehicles though which the citizens are brought together to push for reforms. It is not easy to get people coming together to ask the government of the day to implement initiate reforms in authoritarian systems. This is especially true when there are no channels through which organized communication can take place. But in the presence of political parties, the people can be sent messages using modern means of communication such as email and phone messages so as to meet in places where they can then push their agenda for reforms.
Political parties also assist in the training of leaders in tyrannies. In most cases, the party that is in power mistreats the other parties that are always clamoring for reforms. The challenges that the leadership of these other parties have to undergo are potent training elements in what it takes to survive in tough political conditions. Some of the leaders of such parties make good leaders once they are elected and this can be attributed to the training they receive from their parties in the course of pushing for reforms.
Besides the above, political parties act as avenues of education on the principles of democracy in undemocratic states. Despite the repressive climate, a number of parties in authoritarian societies are usually dedicated to genuine reforms. In such cases, these parties are always equipped with the right information to pass on to the masses. This information is usually about the elements of a democratic society and the urgency to do away with the existing tyrannical situation. There is no other way in which the citizens can be better informed other than through political parties. Political parties also provide the present government as well as the next government in case the existing one is not given another chance by the people.
Discussion of how party systems evolve, type of system that has evolved in Canada, the United States, Germany, Spain, and Italy; the factors that have contributed to the development of multiparty systems in former communist East European states after the collapse of communism
The evolution of political parties is closely tied to the democratic condition of a country. The idea here is that democratic societies are more tolerant and they therefore tend to accommodate as many viewpoints as possible. This leads to the formation of as many political parties as possible with various ideologies. Authoritarian societies tend to be oppressive and the harassment of people with divergent views does not allow for the formation of many political parties. It is therefore not surprising to note one or two political parties in dictatorships. For example the former USSR and modern day Russia as well as China are not democratic. You can therefore not find more than one party in these countries. North Korea also falls into this category. Most countries that are intolerant when it comes to multipartism are communist leaning. The United States as the most successful democracy on earth has matured over time and two big parties have emerged as the carriers of greater percentages of the population. There are other smaller parties with small numbers of members. These small parties are unheard of to the level that someone who is not interested may think that the United States of America has only two political parties.
The Democratic Party of the United States seems to be the leading in terms of members due to its popularity with young people and minorities; who are currently the largest voting group in the United States. The Republican Party comes second with a declining membership due to its alleged lose of touch with the realities of the 21st century politics. The Democratic Party is considered a leftist party while the Republican Party is considered a rightist party.
Canada, Germany, Spain, and Italy are equally democratic societies with the ability to accommodate divergent views and therefore it is not surprising to witness more than one political party. For example in Germany, the Social Democrats and the Christian Democrats are always facing competition from small parties such as the Green Party; whose platform is the defense of the environment.
The collapse of communism has been followed by the rise of multipartism in the former east European countries. The collapse of communism itself has been a huge incentive for the rise of multipartism in that the repressive and intolerant nature of communism is no more. Therefore people who had to hide their opinions because of fear of retribution from communist elements cannot be sacred anymore since capitalism as championed by the United States trumped communism with its oppressive principles.
Discuss the differences in the functions of political parties and pressure groups. Give Canadian examples of the various types of pressure groups discussed in the text. How effective are they in Canada’s parliamentary system of government? Why are many democratic governments moving to register the groups that pressure them?
Discussion of the differences in the functions of political parties and pressure groups. Canadian examples of the various types of pressure groups discussed in the text
Political parties are used by people who are interested in leadership to mobilize support. The function of pressure groups is to push the government of the day into enacting an agenda that favors what the pressure groups think is acceptable. Pressure groups come in form of Non-Governmental Organizations of NGOs, community based organizations or CBOs, civil society organizations or CSOs and professional groups. The most potent area where pressure groups come in is legislation where they apply pressure on the government of the day so as to make it legislate on a particular agenda such as the environment.
Important pressure groups in Canada include the Canadian Tax Foundation, the Canadian Medical Association, the Business Council on National Issues, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce and the Canadian Manufacturers’ Association. These pressure groups play a role in the legislation process by applying pressure on the politicians in the senate and the House of Commons.
The reason as to why many democratic governments have moved to register pressure groups that pressure them is to avoid major confrontations with the citizens who can be mobilized by these groups in the event that they are denied legislation. Besides that, pressure groups play a vital role in arguing ideas that are beneficial to the policy makers.
In recent years, some pressure groups claiming to represent the ‘public interest’ have emerged on the issues of abortion, the environment, gun control, and capital punishment. Identification and discussion of the activities of some of these groups, their effectiveness
Some to the pressure groups include Focus on the Family, Abortion Law Reform Association, Climate Action Network, Campaign Against Climate Change and Worldwide Fund for Nature.
The Focus on the Family pressure group was established in the 1960s and has been at the forefront in the condemnation of abortion and gay marriages. It runs radio and television programs that are meant to dissuade people from supporting gay marriages and abortion. Abortion Law Reform Association is an organization whose aim is to ensure that abortion is not declared illegal. Their argument is that there are circumstances under which the woman must abort, and all that needs to be emphasized in this case is clean abortion. Climate Action Network, Campaign Against Climate Change and Worldwide Fund for Nature are all environment-base pressure groups operating from various parts of the world but mostly in the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. There major focus is to reverse the wheels of climate change since it is causing havoc in the planet. The effectiveness of the abortion pressure groups is highly in doubt since abortion is a highly divisive issue that cannot be easily solved. The pressure groups that are focused on the climate are likely to succeed due to the evidence of adverse effects of climate change.
Elections and Electoral Systems
Exercising the vote is one of the most basic rights of political participation. Is the vote of a single individual a powerful political tool? What can be said about the percentage of voter turnout in national elections for Canada and the United States?
The vote of an individual is a powerful political tool. It is not uncommon to come across people who think that at individual level their votes mean little. It should be clear that it is the accumulation of this singular votes that millions of votes are cast at the end of a voting period. What if everyone else says that his or her one vote is insignificant? No one will appear at the pools. Voter turnout in the United States and Canada has been going down over time. In some years there are slight increases such as the 2008 presidential election in the United States when Barack Obama stirred the political landscape and encouraged many new voters to take part in the process. But in a general sense, voter turnout has been declining over time. This is due to the rise in cynicism over the ability of politicians to bring about change.
Discussion of what is an electoral system, the role of an electoral system in determining the outcome of an election, and how does the single-member district with plurality affect Canada’s party system
An electoral system is an established infrastructural framework that provides for the election of leaders. The electoral system employs the personnel, runs the elections by guiding the voters and counts the votes. Then it announces the winner by use of the counted votes. The single-member district with plurality affects Canada’s party system by giving advantage to large parties that have the mobilization ability and therefore can mobilize voters for their candidates so as to set the candidate ahead of the winner’s post before everyone else. This can lead to an imbalanced assembly in terms of political parties. Proportional representation will lead to equal voices for the political parties in the senate and the hose. Given the fairness that comes with the proportional representation system, Canada should indeed change their system.
The process unleashed when Canada calls an election. If a federal election was called today, who do you think would win and why? What about a provincial election?
In Canada, when it is an election season, the electoral commission declares the relevant positions vacant and invites applications. Then campaign days are set and the candidates hit the campaign trail. If an election was to be held today at the federal level, the current Prime Minister, S. Harper, and his conservative party would emerge victorious. This is because of his policies that have kept Canada fairly stable even in the face of the work financial crisis since the great depression. The provincial elections would also be won by the conservatives due to the working policies.
Identification and discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of the U.S. primary system as a means of nominating candidates to elective office, and whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?
The primary system is acts as a time for mobilizing voters and this increases turn out in the general election. It also assists in fundraising for politicians as well as making the citizens know the people who are out for election. This enables them make informed choices at the time of the general election. The disadvantage of the primary system is that it is time consuming and it creates room for baseless propaganda. The advantages are more than the disadvantages. This is due to the fact that what the country and the individual politicians benefit more than they lose because of the primaries.
Do televised debates between and among leadership candidates way election outcomes in Canada and the United States? Which group of voters is most likely to be persuaded by debates?
Televised debates among leadership candidates can sway elections and they actually sway elections in the US and Canada. The young adults as well as the middle aged are the ones who can be easily persuaded by debates. I am a voter who pays attention to debates before deciding which party to support.
Analyzing the Global System
Identification of the principal actors in the contemporary international system and discuss their roles in determining the stability and the instability of that system
Principal actors include international organizations such as the United Nations and the individual countries. Mediation of conflict by the UN stabilizes the system while cross border conflict creates instability.
How terrorism has changed the meaning of homeland security to governments and international organizations. If governments remain preoccupied looking inward with issues of Homeland Security, will the threat of terrorism rollback or speed up the advance of globalization? Can state armies be agents of terrorism?
Terrorism has made government view homeland security as an attempt to block terror groups from hurting citizens. Looking inward will let terrorism rollback globalization. State armies can be agents of terrorism if they are involved in shedding innocent t blood.
100 years from now, will nation-states still dominate international affairs? If not, what organizations will? In what way do multinational corporations challenge the power of nation states?
100 year from now, nations states will not dominate international affairs. Powerful international organizations as well as regional ones such as the European Union will dominate the world. These multinationals challenge the power of nation states by overstepping their authority and implementing international or regional law.
Unequal in size and unequal in power, Canada and the United States conduct a unique relationship in world politics. Why is it unique and how stable is it? List of three issues that will unite our interests and three that will divide our interests in the next 10 years.
The uniqueness of the relationship between the US and Canada is that despite Canada’s small size, the two countries have a respectable relationship.
Three unifying factors: Culture, Education, and Diplomacy.
Three areas of division: Immigration, Foreign policy towards other countries and trade.
Should Canada, the United States, and Mexico renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with the United States? List three areas that are negotiable and three that are not negotiable.
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) should be renegotiated. Negotiable areas: Import tariffs, trade volume, and expansion of product type (Bacon 19-23). Non-negotiable areas: Membership, duration, and implementation
Law in the Global System
In the absence of a world legislature, where laws would be introduced, debated and proclaimed, can it be said that international law is real law? How has globalization influenced the creation of international law?
International law is real law since the various parties agree to it. Globalization has allowed the many entities to operate under international law (Köchler 45).
Why do most states voluntarily observe international law most of the time? Why do some states violate international law? Give examples
Obeying international law is a way of supporting world peace. Some states violate international law for purposes of self defense or selfish interests.
Discussion of how the International Criminal Tribunals have influenced the development of international law. Description of the role of the International Law Commission on the codification of international law
The International Criminal Tribunals have influenced the development of international by acting as a source of international law. The International Law Commission checks proposed international law before it is codified.
What is the role of the United Nations in the creation of world law? How do regional international organizations like the OAS promote principles of international law and order?
The UN acts as the umbrella advocate for world order. Regional bodies like OAS promote international law by obeying its regulations.
Foreign Policy and Diplomacy in International Affairs
Discussion of the evolution of diplomacy as a privileged profession with unique exemptions and immunities. It has been argued that modern communications make the contemporary job of a diplomat obsolete
Diplomacy has developed over time to become a meaningful international job. The fact that the diplomats do not carry out personal business is the major motivation for the immunity. Even with all the communication, human presence is important and therefore diplomats are still important.
Comment on what is Canada’s most important foreign policy and why you think it is significant. Identify an interest group that you regard as exerting a powerful influence on Canadian foreign policy and why you think it is so influential
The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are the most important foreign policy elements for Canada because they have the potential of disrupting its operations if they are not handled well.
The Canadian Manufactures Association is influential as an interest group because of its trade interests.
Discussion of the four major contemporary influences on diplomacy. Will multilateral diplomacy eventually displace bilateral diplomacy? Evaluation of the opportunities and pitfalls of summit diplomacy
Interstate relations, modern conflict, non-state actors, and bilateralism are the major contemporary influences on diplomacy. Multilateral diplomacy will eventually replace bilateral diplomacy due to the increasing network among more than two nations.
Identification and discussion of three threats to Canada’s security. Identification of three foreign-policy goals that should be pursued by Canadian diplomats and leaders
Three threats to Canada’s security include terrorists, drug traffickers, and poverty. Foreign policy goals for Canadian diplomats and leaders include international trade, financial regulation and peace.
Global Challenges in the 21st Century
Has the US war in Iraq since 2003 made the world more dangerous or more stable? Has Canada’s military presence in Afghanistan contributed to international peace?
The Iraq war has made the world more dangerous. Canada’s military has contributed to world peace by trying to deal with the Taliban and Canada can give aid to poor countries where the poor are easily recruited to terror gangs.
Discussion of the hypothesis that the best way for nation-states to preserve peace is to prepare for war. Does global interdependence promote peace? What kinds of foreign-policy strategies and tactics would you recommend to meet the challenge of peace? Why is peace such an ideologically charged concept?
Preparing for war as a way of looking for peace leads to preparedness in case of an attack. Interdependence promotes peace and global peace can be achieved through poverty eradication and education to all.
The frequency of international acts of violence has diminished in the twentieth century. Discussion of the apparent irony of this fact against the possibility of nuclear annihilation. Do you think the risk of annihilation posed by nuclear weapons has caused a reduction in the frequency of war since the end of the Second World War? Discuss whether negotiated arms-control agreements can achieve the goal of arms reduction and possible disarmament
The irony is that there is reduced frequency of conflict with the presence of more dangerous weapons. The nuclear weapons have reduced the frequency of conflict and total disarmament is no possible.
Does the world have a population problem? How do you think the population problem can be tackled without violating fundamental human rights?
The world does not have a population problem. All that needs to be done is to distribute the available resources fairly.
What are the major causes of environmental degradation? Explain why no one state can solve the ecology mess we are just discovering
Pollution from factories is the major source of environmental degradation. No one state can solve the mess because it is from many states and it is widespread.
Can we say that a “sustainable environment” is a human right? Why or why not? Can we have a major positive impact on the ecology at the municipal level? How? Should be declared pollution to be an act of terricide (murder of the Earth) and consider it a crime against humanity?
Sustainable environment should be a human right since every human being is entitled to the same. At the municipal level it is difficult to have a major positive impact due to the size. Pollution should be declared terricide and considered a crime against humanity.
References
Bacon, David. The Children of NAFTA: Labor wars on the U.S./Mexico Border. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004.Print.
Cheffins, Ronald & Johnson, Patricia. Revised Canadian Constitution: Politics As Law. New York: Mcgraw-Hill Ryerson Ltd, 1986.Print.
Köchler, Hans. Democracy and the International Rule of Law. New York: Springer, 1995.Print.
Nathaniel Thomas Johnson (born May 11, 1970) is a candidate from a Democratic party who was born and raised in Texas. Johnson is an entrepreneur who owns a media company named NJ for the Future. The candidate has a long history of political involvement and experience in the field. He has always been interested in politics and, during his teenage years, he was a member of the local Youth Parliament. Johnson owns a Master’s degree in Political Sciences from the University of Texas-Austin. After his graduation, he started working as a political journalist, writing about political campaigns, elections, and political parties. Notably, Johnson’s works were recognized by the Washington Post and the New York times; the latter organization offered him a job but he had to refuse, as he did not want to relocate. Instead, Johnson started his own media company, as he wanted to help the public in getting into politics and learning more about this field. The candidate’s aim has always been to improve people’s lives by providing them with an excellent living and working environment through local and national policies.
Johnson’s colleagues have noted his accountability, tolerant attitudes, organized nature, outspokenness, and innovativeness. They report that Johnson is a person that values honesty and people’s feedback on his actions; he expresses his opinions freely and expects others to do so, too. The candidate’s coworkers also say that he is good at communicating with others and considering their needs, setting long-term goals, and fulfilling his promises. They note that he is trustworthy, credible, and dependable.
Campaign Message
Nathaniel T. Johnson is running in the 2022 general election for the Governor of Texas. As mentioned above, he has always tried to improve the lives and well-being of the state’s population. His primary campaign message is that all Texans should have access to high-standard education and quality jobs. One of the most significant missions Johnson has is to improve Texans’ access to the labor market. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2019) reports that the unemployment rate in Texas is around 3,4%, which is higher than in some other states, such as Virginia, Colorado, or Iowa. It means that the campaign’s message is effective in Texas. In addition, Johnson wants to focus on the needs of the diverse communities and minority groups living in the state of Texas specifically. He wants to ensure that all individuals have access to quality jobs regardless of their ethnic and cultural background, as well as their beliefs.
Another focus of Johnson’s campaign is providing Texans coming from various social and economic backgrounds with access to quality education. Today’s world requires specialists to have a high level of knowledge, skills, and proficiency, and it is vital to ensure that the people living in Texas can satisfy these requirements. As a former member of the Youth Parliament, Johnson is aware of the issues young people encounter when choosing their educational and career paths. The candidate wants to inspire individuals to explore the world around them by offering them opportunities for learning and educating themselves. To do so, Johnson works on developing loan programs that would not leave students in debt for the rest of their lives, as well as secured scholarships for those showing excellent academic performance. He believes that improved access to education will enhance the quality of Texans’ lives significantly.
Campaign Strategy
Johnson aims at coordinating local and national authorities and collaborating with them to achieve improvements in the state’s labor market and the level of the population’s education. The groups of individuals that are likely to vote for the candidates include both young people and adults. College students and their parents represent one of the most significant groups of Johnson’s supporters. For them, enhanced access to education is crucial, as they may have a limited ability to afford college and want to avoid the burden of student loans. Students’ parents may also want to ensure that their children receive a degree at a high-ranked university, which can be potentially valuable for young people’s future careers.
The second group of individuals that is likely to vote for the candidate is the representatives of minority groups and people coming from low social and economic backgrounds. For these communities, increased access to the labor market is crucial because they may want to improve their position in society along with the quality of their lives. Moreover, these groups are likely to experience workplace discrimination, which means that they are in need of the candidate’s support (Triana, Jayasinghe, & Pieper, 2015). Finally, due to the problem of underemployment, the third target group is individuals having a high degree of education but being unable to get a quality job. Thus, it is possible to say that Johnson’s campaign will appeal to all groups of society but especially lower and middle-class voters, young people, college students, and their parents.
Campaign Resources
Several types of people and organizations are likely to donate money to and work in Johnson’s campaign. First, local and state organizations working with underserved groups of the population are expected to support the candidate, as his future work aims at improving minorities’ living conditions. Second, companies organizing support, shelter, and other activities for people coming from lower social and economic backgrounds can also donate money or put effort into the candidate’s campaign. Johnson’s desire to enhance the population’s quality of life can lead to granting financial aid to such organizations, which means that it is beneficial for them to support him. Third, college students can volunteer for the campaign, too, as they know that Johnson’s work can improve their access to education significantly.
The local Youth Parliament is also one of the groups that can align with Johnson. Volunteers from the organization can help the candidate to share the information about his campaign with the public and discuss the challenges that it will address. The local Youth Parliament can be supportive because Johnson was its member for many years and contributed to its development. His work made the local Youth Parliament one of the most recognizable youth organizations in Texas. It is evident that the employees of NJ for the Future represent another group of supporters for the campaign. They are likely to align with Johnson because they show a high degree of loyalty to the candidate due to his attitude towards him and the personal qualities he has. They can publish materials about Johnson’s campaign, discuss its potential benefits for the population, and motivate the public to vote for the candidate. Thus, it is possible to conclude that Johnson has at least five types of potential donors and voters.
References
Triana, M. D. C., Jayasinghe, M., & Pieper, J. R. (2015). Perceived workplace racial discrimination and its correlates: A meta‐analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(4), 491-513.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2019). Texas economy at a glance. Web.
At its basic understanding an electoral system is a set of rules that is used to determine how the choice of a president or a political party is conducted and how the results are counted. Voting structure takes into consideration several necessary details, such as the age of voters, time and place of the elections, and financial limits on campaign spending when creating the best environment for making decisions. At the same time, while electoral system is a complex and detailed procedure, it is organized by every government individually. For instance, the U.S. has a unique practice of electing authoritative figures that includes a large number of necessary elements. Therefore, the following presentation will provide an in-depth understanding of the U.S. electoral system by discussing its distinguishing features and processes.
The Electoral College
A body consisting of 538 electors.
A sum of electors differs by state.
Election of the president and vice president .
270 electoral votes – a winning number.
In general, the voting organization in the U.S. can be described by the term Electoral College. This phrase describes a body of electors that is appointed by every state for the purpose of choosing the president and the vice president of the U.S. After completing the process of general election by the citizens, the candidate who receives a preference of the majority gains all the votes from the electors of this state (Bugh, 2016). To win the desired position, the applicant needs to get at least 270 votes from all electors (Bugh, 2016). Thus, the procedure does not end with the choice of residents; it continues with electoral votes.
The Purpose of Political Parties
Broadening of the rights of voters.
Extending political rights to all layers of the society.
Eliminating voting restrictions.
Increasing the level of democracy in the country.
In addition to the Electoral College, there are several other elements highly involved in the voting system of the country and one of them is a role of political parties. First and foremost, it is necessary to mention that the U.S. was the first country in the world to create a program that would transfer the executive power from one party to another through an election (Bugh, 2016). Political parties proved to be essential in expanding the political rights of individuals and eliminating the restrictions on voting (Bugh, 2016). Hence, the main purpose of political parties in the U.S. is the expansion of democracy and freedoms of the population.
The 2 Parties and Their Function
Two major parties: the Republican and the Democratic.
Control of the president, the Congress, and the legislatures.
Two-party system – a vital element of American politics.
Nowadays, the two dominating political groups in the U.S. are the Republican and the Democratic parties. They both have the power to control the Congress, the presidency, and the legislative government of the state (Bugh, 2016). For instance, since 1852 every president of the U.S. was either a Republican or a Democrat (Bugh, 2016). Various third parties exist in the country, however, they do not get as much popularity and recognition. For this reason, it can be concluded that the two-party system controls the electoral politics and operates as a critical aspect for the American political system.
Citizens’ Role in the Process
Choosing the best candidate through a participation in elections.
Trusting an individual to represent the desires of the population.
The population of the U.S. is obviously an essential part of the electoral system since people are the ones who desire to live in an improved environment and, consequently, make vital decisions. One of the most obvious ways through which the citizens of the U.S. can take part in the process of elections is voting. By choosing particular candidates for the position, people give them their trust to represent their ideas and opinions in front of the whole world. Therefore, individuals need to remember that their vote matters and has a contribution to the outcome of the elections.
Other Ways of Participation
Working in political campaigns.
Engaging in discussions.
Raising awareness about the current issues.
Joining pressure and interest groups.
Even though taking part in the voting process is the most effective way to be involved in the elections, there are many other means of individual participation. Some U.S. citizens voluntarily choose to engage in political campaigns of different candidates by advertising them to their local communities (Bugh, 2016). Others decide to take part in the procedure by raising awareness about various issues that exist in modern American society (Bugh, 2016). Finally, a possible way of contributing to the elections is joining an interest group where people share similar opinions and concerns (Bugh, 2016). Thus, there are several opportunities for individual involvement, and citizens should take advantage of them.
Caucuses vs. Primary Elections
Primaries
Similar to general elections.
An individual choice on a secret ballot.
A person with the biggest number of votes is the winner.
When the Republican and the Democratic parties organize the process of nominating the best candidates, which happens months before the actual election, they select applicants by using two different methods: caucuses and primary elections. A primary is a way to choose a candidate that is similar to the general election (“Primaries and caucuses,” n.d.). It is organized on the statewide level, and individuals can make their choice by putting a mark on a secret ballot (“Primaries and caucuses,” n.d.). Consequently, whoever receives the most significant number of votes is the winner of a primary election. In presidential primary, the successor is then given “a majority number of the state’s delegates to the nominating convention” (“Primaries and caucuses,” n.d.).
Caucuses
Organized by political parties themselves.
Meetings of different groups of citizens.
Collective discussions of candidates.
Caucus, in comparison to a primary, is an entirely different practice. Caucuses are special meetings organized by the members of a political party where they collectively discuss the applicants and decide on the best candidate for the position. (“Primaries and caucuses,” n.d.). At the end of the gathering, there is an election that decides on the delegates who will represent a candidate from the majority (“Primaries and caucuses,” n.d.). These delegates then decide on the ambassadors to the national convention who, eventually, choose a figure to run the office (“Primaries and caucuses,” n.d.). Thus, while a primary election is an individual process, caucus focuses on gathering and discussing similar opinions about the candidates.
The Role of Caucuses and Primary Elections
After learning more about each of the methods and watching a video about them, it becomes clear that they carry a specific purpose in the presidential election process. In general, through the implementation of these practices, the Republican and the Democratic parties decide on their best candidates for the representation during the elections. While caucuses engage individuals in discussions and debates, primaries give a chance to express personal opinion anonymously. Furthermore, these two types of elections ensure that the two-party system dominates and will continue to be prevalent in U.S. politics. This is because primaries and caucuses limit the choice of voters during the general election, and the elected president is either a Democrat or a Republican. Therefore, the two methods are essential for the already established political system.
National Conventions
An official meeting of delegates.
Nominating the candidates.
Deciding on the principles and goals of the party.
Adopting the rules for party activities.
After completing the selection of candidates through primaries and caucuses, political parties hold national conventions. The participation in the assembly is set by each party individually; therefore, the number of voting representatives is different (Bugh, 2016). National conventions are the meetings organized in order to nominate the candidates for the position of the president and the vice president of the U.S. (Bugh, 2016). In addition, these practices aim at formally deciding on the primary principles and goals of the party and stating the main rules for their operations (Bugh, 2016). Generally, national conventions finalize the most vital decisions of the party.
The Modern Purposes of Conventions
To sell rather than select.
To introduce an individual and their program.
To communicate with the voters in an unmediated way.
To influence people’s decision-making process.
Even though the formal meaning of a national convention is to nominate the candidates, it can be stated that, nowadays, the purpose has slightly changed. Berman (2016) suggested that “the conventions are organized to sell, rather than select, the politicians who rank-and-file voters chose at the polls” (para. 2). Assemblies offer nominees an opportunity to introduce themselves and their program to voters and possibly influence their decision about the future president (Berman, 2016). The acceptance speech presented by the applicants is a unique way to communicate with the population in an unmediated way (Berman, 2016). The convention sets a narrative which is then associated with a particular candidate.
The General Election Campaign
The Electoral College system influences campaigns.
Targeting states with the most electors.
Ensuring a favorable position in California, Texas, New York, Florida.
Driven by media such as, television and the Internet.
Focused on a favorable representation of the candidate.
Debates – a vital campaign element.
Television debates attract the attention of U.S. citizens.
Once the nominees are known to the general public, the official process of a general election campaign starts. Since the U.S. political system is established around the Electoral College concept, candidates focus their attention on targeting states with the largest number of electors (Bugh, 2016). By investing funds into such states as, for instance, California and Texas, individuals hope to ensure their dominating position in the eyes of Americans (Bugh, 2016). Therefore, instead of putting energy into the development of a campaign that would interest the whole country, candidates create programs suitable for specific states with the biggest number of electoral votes.
Contemporary presidential campaigns are driven by media since it is the most critical means of receiving information and learning more about various events happening in the country. For this reason, candidates spend millions of dollars on advertising and community meetings to generate a positive media representation. One of the most popular campaign processes is the debates between the Republican and the Democratic presidential candidates (Bugh, 2016). Since 1976, debates are a vital element of the election process which attract the attention of millions of individuals in the U.S. (Bugh, 2016). Debates are presented on television channels which gives everyone an opportunity to watch and analyze them.
The Influence of Debates
Candidates’ discussions are closely analyzed in the media.
Result in a shift of public opinion.
A more prepared and confident candidate is in favor.
Can change individuals’ choice of the president.
While presidential debates are an essential component of candidates’ campaigns, they can have a massive influence on the election process. Discussions between the representatives of each party are carefully analyzed by knowledgeable individuals on different media platforms (Bugh, 2016). These critiques sometimes result in a shift of general opinion about this or that individual and, eventually, affect people’s choice of the president (Bugh, 2016). For this reason, candidates need to take into consideration all the possible outcomes of the debates and be prepared to answer any question or provide a comment for different controversial arguments.
The Role of Media
Helps to create a positive image.
Develops bias and fraud.
Journalists decide who to cover according to their personal choice.
Some candidates are left invisible.
People do not know enough about each applicant.
Only energetic, scandalous, and revolutionary people are discussed.
The information is filtered according to likes and follows.
An exposure to a limited spectrum of opinions.
Direct access to candidate profiles and opinions.
An establishment of a strong personal connection.
As it has already been mentioned, modern political campaigns are established around the media. In order to make an important decision, voters are in need of sustainable knowledge about the benefits that a particular person can bring to their life. Thus, candidates invest significant funds and personal effort in creating a positive image of themselves on various social media platforms, radio, and television. For instance, media representation includes various video advertisements on Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter created to target the youngest population of the voters. Television and radio advertisements are developed for a slightly older part of the American population. However, in addition to positively portraying the candidate, the media can contribute to the emergence of bias, fraud, and fake news.
Some individuals can be left out of the media by journalists and political experts. This tendency exists because authoritative figures in the sphere of politics decide who to cover, favor, and criticize individually (Brichacek, n.d.). It is in their personal choice which candidates to analyze and how much and, as indicated by Brichacek (n.d.), these decisions alone can have a massive influence on the outcome of elections. For instance, some people can be left invisible for the general public because their personalities are not as scandalous as the characters of others, or their programs are not distinct enough.
Another tendency created by the media is the fact that the information the audience receives is filtered. What people see on their social media platforms is based on their preferences according to likes, follows, and comments (Brichacek, n.d.). Hence, instead of accepting a diversity of opinions, individuals are exposed to filtered reports based on their own choices (Brichacek, n.d.). Nevertheless, social media gives users a chance to get direct access to candidates’ lives, views, and opinions (Brichacek, n.d.). Through media, people can establish an intimate relationship with a person that they have never met before.
The Role of Money
A vital element of a political campaign.
A proper representation in front of the public.
Covers transportation, advertising, political consulting.
Mostly private funds; public money available for president candidates.
Helps rich people and harms the poor.
Not a deciding factor in political elections.
An advantage in addition to other possibilities.
Money is another essential part of any political campaign. Without the existence of large funds, applicants cannot accurately present themselves to the general public and contribute to the positive outcome of the elections. It is necessary to mention that most of the political campaigns have to be financed privately; however, public funds are available for the presidential candidates both during primary and general elections (Bugh, 2016). Political campaigns include many expenditures, such as advertising, transportation, political consulting, communication with voters through social media (Bugh, 2016). Consequently, money is a critical part of an election process as it ensures an effective result of the campaign.
Since money is essential for the election process, it can help some of the wealthiest individuals significantly and, at the same time, put others in an unfavorable position. This phenomenon exists primarily because candidates with the biggest funds have millions of possibilities to be active in their campaigns and ensure coverage on social media. For this reason, they may leave out other applicants who have less financial possibilities. On the other hand, it is proved that money is not a deciding factor when it comes to political elections (Bugh, 2016). Finances are definitely a huge advantage, but a valid program, knowledge, and impactful communication with the voters are some of the more important elements.
Conclusion
Overall, the following presentation proved that the U.S. electoral system is complex and consists of several crucial details. Even though many people refer to the whole process as the Electoral College, there are many elements that are necessary to happen before that. Some of the practices included in the voting process are primary elections and caucuses, national conventions, political campaigns on social media and television, general elections, and debates. Individuals from the general public can also be highly involved in the process by promoting desired candidates, spreading awareness, and participating in general elections. In addition, the media and finances play an essential role in any political campaign and can even influence the outcome of the elections. Therefore, in order to understand the whole system better, the presentation discussed all the mentioned aspects in more depth.
In November 2018, Texans faced an unusually close race between Republican Ted Cruz and Democrat Beto O’Rourke for the seat in the US Senate. The reason for discussing this situation in much detail is that, during many years, Texans have been supporting Republicans, and O’Rourke’s certain success in the race has provoked debates regarding current political trends in Texas. It is important to understand how voter distribution and demographics, particular citizens’ issues of concern, and the role of certain interest groups and political action committees could influence the development of politics in Texas. Although Texas is widely known for supporting Republicans, changes in voters’ demographics, their visions regarding certain social and economic issues, and the impact of interest groups have contributed to changing political trends in the state.
Voter Demographics and Distribution in Texas
Since 1994, Texas has been perceived as a “red” state where voters widely support Republicans. However, during the recent years, the situation has begun to change in the major cities of the state that became “blue.” This was observed because of the interest of the Hispanic, African American, and younger population in Democrats’ ideas and views (Svitek and Livingston). According to Wallace, voters in Texas tend not to support Republicans directly because they usually prefer not to vote as it is indicated with reference to a low voter turnout in the state. Therefore, according to some views, Republicans usually win elections referring to the tradition of citizens in Texas to vote in the context of the “red” framework.
Still, the situation seems to change, as it is demonstrated with reference to the US Senate elections of 2018 when Democrat O’Rourke gained significant popularity among Texans. Ramsey states that “a purple Texas will emerge eventually, according to folk wisdom … Republicans still have the upper hand, by most accounts. But Democrats are enthusiastic.” In spite of the fact that it is almost impossible to argue that Texas is currently “purple,” voters’ demographics and their reaction to Democrats has altered.
The current voter distribution with the focus of many young citizens on Democrats’ views allows for speaking about a significant impact of voters on politics in Texas. O’Rourke has succeeded in changing voters’ opinions regarding the Democratic course and took advantage of shifting from orienting toward “red” middle-aged and older voters to younger ones who chose between following Republicans or Democrats (Wallace). From this perspective, changes in voter distribution and demographics in Texas helped O’Rourke gain support in large cities, but there was also a comparably low voter turnout among young and Hispanics citizens (Wallace). As a result, Republican Cruz won the election, but it is possible to concentrate on observable changes in political trends in Texas that provided some challenges for Cruz. Still, they helped O’Rourke to become an actively discussed political figure in the state and nationally.
Issues Texans Care About
The key issues Texans care about and focus on while selecting a candidate to follow are health care, education, gun control, and immigration. As in many other states of the country, health care and the consequences of adopting the Affordable Care Act (ACA) are widely discussed by Texans. Cruz actively criticizes the ACA and wants to provide citizens with other opportunities to purchase insurance (Galen; Yount et al.). O’Rourke is not as radical in his views regarding the necessity of more health care reforms, and he supported the ACA in the past (Yount et al.). Referring to education, Texans are concerned about its costs, and Cruz is oriented toward changing the role of the US Department of Education in influencing educational policies and curricula in states. Thus, Cruz states, “State and local governments should be the decision makers in public education. Washington’s one size fits all policies do not work” (Yount et al.). In his turn, O’Rourke proposes increasing governmental aid to public schools because “Every child deserves access to a high-quality education” (Yount et al.). These ideas reflect the courses traditionally developed by Democratic and Republican parties in Texas.
The issue of gun control is actively discussed by Texans in relation to the question of education as the reaction to school shootings. Cruz responds to this issue in the following way: “I believe that taking away law-abiding Americans’ constitutional rights is not the way to make our schools safer” (Yount et al.). O’Rourke’s ideas are similar to Cruz’s ones, “Texas should lead the way in preserving the 2nd Amendment while ensuring people can live and go to school without fear of gun violence” (Yount et al.). These politicians’ positions regarding the immigration question are different and reflect the ideas typical of the representatives of their parties. Cruz tends to support initiatives directed toward preventing illegal immigration by all possible means, and O’Rourke is against radical activities and the family separation as a consequence of these activities. Thus, it is possible to state that both Cruz and O’Rourke closely follow official positions of their parties in order to accentuate the difference in their views. In the context of current trends in Texans’ support for Republicans and Democrats, this difference works to attract more followers among the target audience.
The Role of Interest Groups and Political Action Committees
The election to the US Senate in Texas attracted numerous parties and political action committees (PACs) that were focused on supporting a certain candidate to promote their interests. Before starting his campaign, O’Rourke refused to accept resources provided by the PAC in order to fund his campaign, preventing the impact of interest parties’ and committees’ views on his political course. However, O’Rourke raised more money in comparison to Cruz while taking into account only donations. Thus, “donations, most of them small but hundreds of thousands of them, began rolling in — with some supporters motivated in part by O’Rourke’s emphatic refusal to accept money from PACs” (Svitek and Livingston). As a result, O’Rourke’s wide campaign in social media and on other Internet platforms was sponsored by his adherents, indicating voters’ support for this Democrat’s course. From this perspective, O’Rourke’s position regarding non-accepting PAC’s money contributed to increasing his popularity among his followers in Texas who eagerly demonstrated their support.
In his turn, Cruz was actively supported by the PAC to guarantee the majority of Republicans in the US Senate, and he did not refuse to take financial support. As a result, he received access to more resources in order to finance his campaign with reference to PAC’s aid and donations. Both candidates raised millions of dollars with the help of their followers that made the elections of 2018 extremely expensive (Wallace). Thus, it is possible to state that Cruz’s position regarding accepting money from the PAC also contributed to his success in the elections. The Republican received an opportunity to spend many available resources on his campaign without being limited only by private donations, as it was in the case of O’Rourke. It is also possible to assume that the PAC’s support also contributed to the victory of Cruz in the elections that were developing in the context of a rather new political situation in the state. Therefore, the positions of both candidates in terms of using PAC’s resources were helpful for them depending on the specifics of their image among Texans.
Conclusion
The 2018 elections in Texas have demonstrated certain changes in Texans’ views and perceptions regarding political courses. Significant alterations in voter distribution and demographics created the grounds for developing an effective campaign to support O’Rourke in the context of the mainly “red” state. Hispanics and younger citizens became interested in the social media campaign developed by O’Rourke’s team. As a result, Democratic views gained a response in the minds of some Texans. However, the results of the elections indicate that the process of shifting from being “red” to being “purple” or even “blue” in Texas cannot be quick, and the majority of active voters still supports Republicans. Nevertheless, voter demographics, citizens’ visions regarding issues of health care, gun control, education, and immigration, and the role of PACs and interest groups provide triggers for changing political trends in Texas. One should state that the overall process of changing the political situation will be long and complex, but it is almost impossible to ignore the predispositions for such changes referring to Texans’ opinions and choices.
Shockley-Zalabak, P. S., Morreale, S. P., & Stavrositu, C. (2019). Voters’ perceptions of trust in 2016 presidential candidates, Clinton and Trump: Exploring the election’s outcome. American Behavioral Scientist, 63(7), 856-887.
Sides, J., Tesler, M., & Vavreck, L. (2017). The 2016 US election: How Trump lost and won. Journal of Democracy, 28(2), 34-44.
2016 presidential election. (n.d.). 270 to Win. Web.
The case under consideration caused a resonance in American society, as it violated constitutional norms and made the issues of democracy and freedom of speech ambivalent. After the conclusion of this case, the volume of money transfers to the election campaigns has increased markedly, which does not mean that the funding processes have become more transparent. Briefly explaining this case, Citizen United wanted to release on television shortly before the primaries in 2010 a film critical of Hillary Clinton (Citizens united v. Federal election commission | Opinion, dissent, significance, & influence, n.d.). It was meant to hurt her campaign and lower public confidence. There were specific rules for paying for television broadcasting, and it was of particular importance that the launch of the film was named too late. Campaign financiers must follow rules that tie them down, including time limits. Television broadcasting, in this case, was seen as unfair and, at the same time, violated the norms of election campaigns. Based on case law, U.S. courts did not appear to support Citizen United, given past laws (Chaturvedi & Holloway, 2017). However, five to four, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Citizen United and allowed unlimited campaign funding.
I’m afraid I have to disagree with the court for several reasons: disorderly funding, the inability of small donors to donate money, corruption, and lack of transparency. Indiscriminate and unaccountable campaign finance seems initially to lead to relatively harmless consequences. Usually, people tend to understand this as freedom of speech and expression of support for any positions and parties. In public administration and elections, the state is obliged to monitor the processes of campaigns to prevent the coming to power, for example, of an ochlocratic leader. Different people can own prosperous businesses, and not all of them are worthy of having the last word in government.
The decision taken by the court in the long term will make it impossible to assist selected candidates for small businesses. The state, as a protector, could support small businesses, but in a field where extensive financial competition reigns, only business titans can dictate the rules. Small business has their interests: the environment, tax cuts, healthcare and social packages. The state can only protect these interests when competing with the wealthiest companies.
Corruption in the sphere of governance is the most critical and saddest consequence of the court decision. In a system where big businesses can matter so much, where they can break and change the rules, sooner or later, corruption reaches unprecedented levels. Business owners can feel safe, imposing, and bold in such a system (Lau, 2022). The state in which the ruling party comes to power largely thanks to the financing of a large company will not be inclined to check its leaders and processes within it rigidly. This company will be able to promote its interests to the first positions, regardless of other less wealthy companies.
However, one should never forget that the laws of market relations are not applied to the political field. It leads to a lack of transparency, which the judges, who mostly supported Citizen United, sought to avoid. The judges assumed that rules could balance the exorbitant costs of companies in the election race because each company would not have the right to hide as a donor (Abdul-Razzak, 2020). People will see which company donates to the candidate; consequently, society will understand which corporations represent specific interests. However, the system is still too complex, especially for most people who do not have special education in politics and economics.
The above dangers can be summed up in the concept of lobbying, which is already developed in the U.S. and some other countries. Lobbying by large corporations is dangerous for creating a state that meets the values of transparent social mobility, democracy, and freedom of speech (Rosenberg, 2017). Lobbyists and leaders of large companies do not want to be representatives of the people but only want to protect themselves and provide themselves with opportunities for further business. It has nothing to do with domestic or foreign policy, but lobbying makes sense for pragmatics.
The United States has come under attack by the Russian government and other foreign nations trying to interfere with U.S. electoral process. The main aim of these attacks is to support a particular presidential candidate, thereby denying Americans their right to elect the leader they prefer. Interfering in the elections directly attacks the country’s democracy as citizens loose trust in the electoral process. The essay concentrates on Russia’s involvement in meddling with the 2016 and 2020 U.S. presidential elections. Several Russian organizations were implicated during the 2016 presidential race, even though officials from Russia deny involvement. Russia’s meddling in the 2016 elections aimed to undermine Clinton’s candidacy since they considered Clinton’s policies would be anti-Russia. Fortunately, the Federal Bureau of Intelligence (F.B.I) convicted some Russian citizens in connection with alleged meddling, and they were found guilty of various charges. Russia’s interference in the 2020 elections was low compared to the 2016 presidential race. In 2020, Russian authorities spread misleading information about President Biden to undermine his candidacy.
Background
Over the years, many governments have faced accusations of using different strategies to meddle with elections in foreign countries. Citizens of the affected nations are unaware of the tactics foreign governments employ and get to influence the polls. On the other hand, the assertion that the Russian administration meddled in the 2016 and 2020 presidential U.S. elections has aroused worldwide controversy.1 Some argue that it harmed the democratic structure in the United States. Russian activity heralded a new age of international influence.
Consequently, multiple U.S. intelligence and security services have confidently asserted that Russia’s electoral meddling had particular objectives. The goal of Russia was to sabotage the American citizen’s trust in their democratic system.2 There is a good chance the charges were genuine, given the collaboration of numerous security organizations, including the C.I.A., F.B.I., and the National Security Agency. Furthermore, the Trump administration indicated that other nations, individuals, and Russia were involved in compromising U.S. election systems in other states.
Interference in 2016
Even while Russian officials assert that their country did not tamper with the 2016 presidential election in the United States, security assessments show that several Russian organizations were implicated. According to an N.S.A. investigation, Russia attempted to sabotage the 2016 presidential election in the United States.3 Furthermore, Russia engaged in a vast spectrum of acts that suggest it was among the primary nations attempting to sabotage the 2016 presidential elections in the United States.4 Overt activities by Russian federal bureaus, remunerated online trolls, covert operations, and state-backed mainstream press, including cyber-attack operations undertaken by Russian intelligence operatives, are some of the activities that confirm it meddled with the democratic polling system of the U.S.
Russia attempted to undermine Clinton’s presidential candidacy by using state-funded press outlets such as television channels, radio stations, and the internet. In addition, Russia influenced the operation using social media platforms, including Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube.5 Russia had eventual aims in the U.S. 2016 elections as a product of its engagement in operation. Since developing technologies were used to influence the 2016 polls, American secret services could track Russian operations, leading the American public to assume that Russia was attempting to sabotage the election.6 Nonetheless, there are two primary explanations for why Russia was considered to meddle in the 2016 American election,7 including causing the American people to lose trust in national electoral processes and causing discontent with Clinton’s candidacy because she was a member of the Democratic Party.
The U.S. intelligence services accumulated pertinent information that shows Russia had strong participation in the 2016 U.S. election well before the campaigns began. Hackers from Russia attempted to access important U.S. agencies, including the White House and the State Department, using simple approaches like mailing out spam scams before the electoral period.8 Since the hack on John Podesta’s email, Russia has monitored much of Hillary Clinton’s movements throughout her campaigns using these basic methods.9 As campaign chairman, Podesta discovered a shady email that gave Moscow entry to many Democratic Party information. The Russian administration used these data to paint a negative image of Hillary Clinton, with the majority of the messages made public through internet sites.10 Due to the apparent press power, specific individuals had concerns about Clinton becoming the first woman president of the United States, which considerably affected her candidacy.
In addition, several Russian citizens were accused of breaking the law by allegedly interfering with the election process. The F.B.I. has convicted about thirteen Russian citizens in connection with alleged meddling in the 2016 presidential race in the United States.11 Despite Donald Trump’s claims that he did not collude with the Russian authorities to harm Clinton’s campaign, many Democrats disagree.12 Russia has eroded many Americans’ trusts in their democratic system because some Clinton followers think the outcomes were not genuine. The thirteen accused were declared guilty of a variety of charges.
Interference in 2020
According to an investigation by the United States intelligence community, Russia attempted to aid previous President, Donald Trump, in the 2020 presidential race. However, the letter did highlight that there was no evidence that Russia or any foreign government managed to tamper with actual results.13 Russian President Vladimir Putin has given the go-ahead for discrediting Joe Biden’s campaign and the Democratic Party. The Russian government is thought to be helping Trump, weakening public trust in the voting process and deepening socio-political differences in the United States.14 The declassified report is the most extensive analysis of foreign meddling in the 2020 presidential election that the intelligence agencies have revealed.
Russia intended Trump to emerge victoriously, but not to the extent that it did within the 2016 presidential election. Through associates of previous President Trump and his government, Russia attempted to spread false or unverified claims about then-candidate Joe Biden in the 2020 U.S. presidential election.15 The declassified study confirms that Trump’s associates aided Moscow by spreading charges leveled against Biden through Russian-linked Ukrainian officials in the run-up to the November election.16 Additional efforts to affect voters were discovered by U.S. intelligence services, notably Iran’s multi-pronged covert propaganda operation to undermine Trump’s popularity. The investigation also debunks Trump’s supporters’ counter-narrative that China influenced Biden’s account, determining that Beijing did not engage in such activity.
China desired stability in its ties with the United States, and neither electoral outcome appeared to be favorable sufficient for China to incur negative consequences if detected. As per the intelligence agencies, there was no technological tampering with voter identification, polling, or ballot counting in the 2020 presidential election.17 Furthermore, contrary to 2016, the authorities discovered that Russia did not endeavor to cyber-hack the electoral equipment, which is a significant variance.18 Officials from the United States reported they witnessed efforts by Cuba, the Lebanese group Hezbollah, and Venezuela to manipulate the election. They were on a lesser level than those carried out by Iran and Russia.
Following Russia’s election meddling in 2016, the U.S. intelligence community stepped up its operations to avoid a repetition. Andrii Derkach, a Ukrainian politician, was mentioned by U.S. intelligence authorities as an individual who performed a crucial part in Russia’s election meddling actions. Derkach is connected to Russian leaders and the Russian intelligence agencies.19 Moreover, Derkach has communicated with Trump’s previous legal representative in subsequent years, who had propagated unfounded charges concerning Biden’s activities in Ukraine while Biden was vice president in Obama’s administration.
According to the intelligence analysis, despite considering several of his government’s initiatives as anti-Russian, Russian authorities wanted previous President Trump to win re-election. Konstantin Kilimnik, a man with Russian government links, served a crucial role. Kilimnik and Derkach spoke with Trump associates and handed them data to the press for official investigations.20 Derkach produced four-voice recordings claiming Biden sought to shield his son, Hunter, from a fraud case in Ukraine. Giuliani was one of the proponents of such allegations.21 Kilimnik was a business partner of Paul Manafort, Trump’s election manager, in 2016. Trump cleared Manafort for a felony violation that stemmed from an inquiry.
Challenges
Presidential elections are a significant event in American democracy, allowing for a smooth transition in the composition of the country’s top decision-makers and its internal alliances. They frequently result in substantial changes in the nation’s internal and foreign policy and an increase in the likelihood of local and diplomatic war. The goal of Russia’s intervention in the U.S. presidential race was to promote a particular candidate or political party, which may have influenced electoral outcomes.22 They intervened in various ways, from supplying financing to their favorite candidate’s campaign to spreading propaganda and misinformation against the other candidate.
The Russian government attempted to hack the polling devices in the United States, which would favor Trump’s win against Clinton in the 2016 presidential election. During the 2020 election, Russian authorities spread misleading information about Biden, claiming that he interfered and attempted to shield the son from a corruption case.23 The propaganda against President Biden might have affected his campaigns during the November 2020 presidential race because some supporters believed in the false information and likely backed Trump’s presidency.24 Foreign countries meddling in U.S.A. elections have significant negative impacts on democracy as citizens loose trust in the electoral process.
Recommendations
Foreign intervention may regularly inflict substantial harm to the intended nation, and polling results in the intervener’s favor. Although there is no mechanism to prevent or discourage overseas countries from interfering in elections, authorities in the United States may considerably lower the chances that such involvement will impact election outcomes.25 Raising the legal punishment for cooperation, encouraging public enlightenment on the problem, restricting the usage of electronic casting or tallying in polls, and outlawing the employment of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin for campaigns fundraising.
The United States’ democracy should take steps to limit the possibilities that interveners will succeed in putting or retaining their favorite candidate or party in power. These are the scenarios in which the target is more prone to suffer short- and medium-term damage. Any local player who intentionally collaborates with an interfering foreign government should face harsher legal consequences. Domestic individuals’ collaboration with a foreign nation aiming to sway a national election should be defined as a separate felony with a maximum punishment comparable to espionage.
Ohlin, Jens, David. “Did Russia Cyber Interference in the 2016 Election Violate International Law.” 95 Tex. L. Rev 1579, (2017): 1-20. Web.
“Report of the Select Committee on Intelligence on Russian Active Measures Campaigns and Interference in the 2016 U.S. Election.” Counterintelligence Threats and Vulnerabilities 5, (2017): 498-524. Web.
Paul Baines and Nigel Jones. “Influence and Interference in Foreign Elections.” The RUSI Journal 163, no. 1 (2018), 12.
Charles E. Ziegler. “International Dimensions of Electoral Processes: Russia, the USA, and the 2016 Elections.” International Politics 55, no. 7 (2018), 558.
Ziegler, 560.
“Russian Interference in 2016 U.S. Elections.” FBI, 2018.
Ferrara Badawy, Emilio Adam, and Kristina Lerman. “Analyzing the Digital Traces of Political Manipulation: The 2016 Russian Interference Twitter Campaign.” International Conference on Advances in Social Network and Mining, (2018), 29.
Robert S. Mueller. “Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election.” U.S. Department of Justice 1, (2017).
“Russian Interference in 2016 U.S. elections.”
“Report Of the Select Committee on Intelligence on Russian Active Measures Campaigns and Interference in the 2016 U.S. Election.” Counterintelligence Threats and Vulnerabilities 5, (2017), 511.
David Jens Ohlin. “Did Russia Cyber Interference in the 2016 Election Violate International Law.” 95 Tex. L. Rev 1579, (2017), 8.
Blake Jedidiah. “Russian Interference in U.S. Elections: How to protect critical election infrastructure from foreign participation.” Public Contract Law Journal 49, no. 4 (2020), 714.
Jedidiah, 721.
Ohlin, 15.
D. N. Haines. “Foreign Threats to the 2020 US Federal Elections.” Intelligence Community Assessment, (2021), 3.
Haines, 4.
Osei Rex Sarpong. “US 2020 Elections: Russia and the Electoral College.” SSRN, (2022), 4.
Sarpong, 5.
Haines, 6.
“Government Agencies and Private Companies Undertake Actions to Limit the Impact of Foreign Influence in the 2020 U.S. Election.” American Journal of International Law 115, no. 2 (2021), 310.
The solution offered by the State Union and Workforce Advisor is the most practical and advantageous for everybody, based on the proposed options and circumstances. He suggests wearing masks and supporting enforced social separation but not mandating COVID vaccination for government personnel or students. Instead of getting vaccinated against COVID, the consultant insists on getting immunized and enabling government personnel to be checked monthly for COVID. According to the projections connected with this technique, public health, and safety would only improve modestly, and the virus’s transmission rate will likely stay high. The supply of medical services, on the other hand, is likely to lessen the state’s legal liability.
The practicality of this approach lies in the fact that, firstly, hasty decisions aimed at solving the problem do not make sense. What other advisers are proposing can and will have some effect, but it deprives me, as governor, of the opportunity to be re-elected (Wilder-Smith et al. 106). Moreover, my competitor will likely lift all or part of the epidemic prevention restrictions to earn social approval (Wilder-Smith et al. 105). Thus, by introducing harsh measures, or half-measures proposed by other advisers, I can only worsen the state in the future (Eng Koon 90). However, the course of action that I have chosen will secure my place as governor to make sure that in the future, when I receive the post, I will introduce more practical measures. A systematic strategy and a place secured by legitimate elections will effectively deal with the consequences of the pandemic in the future. Thus, the approach proposed by the SUWA is the most practical and promising for everybody.
Works Cited
Eng Koon, Ong. “The Impact of Sociocultural Influences on the COVID-19 Measures—Reflections From Singapore.” Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, vol. 60, no. 2, 2020, pp. 90–92. Crossref, doi:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2020.04.022.
Wilder-Smith, Annelies, et al. “Can We Contain the COVID-19 Outbreak With the Same Measures as for SARS?” The Lancet Infectious Diseases, vol. 20, no. 5, 2020, pp. 102–07. Crossref, doi:10.1016/s1473-3099(20)30129-8.