p_p_man
The 'Euro' European
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2001
- Posts
- 24,253
with a bit of education for us non-Americans as to exactly how things work over there...
And I read it in al-Jazeera!
"The US electoral process, which uses an electoral college instead of a popular vote to determine the winning candidate, has given the US two recent presidents (Clinton and Bush) who earned less than a majority of the popular vote.
It also caused confusion in 2000 during the Florida recount. Yet, it has forced successful presidential candidates to craft nationwide campaigns based on regional considerations rather than merely focusing on the number of votes.
Winning strategy
By understanding the electoral college process, the rest of the world can better understand how US presidents forge a winning national strategy and how national policy is developed.
It also explains how some issues such as gun control and farm subsidies must be addressed by presidential candidates in order to win, while policy towards the Middle East is usually ignored.
In that regard, understanding the US electoral process means understanding how best to influence US policy.
The US electoral process was developed as a result of the political realities in America in 1776. The American War of Independence against Britain wasn't a war of a unified American nation, but a war by 13 sovereign colonies, who had given limited powers to a Continental Congress.
When the 13 colonies defeated the British in 1781, each colony maintained a military and printed its own money. This left the central government with little real power.
Differing philosophies
Consequently, there was a need to craft a constitution that would give the American central government more power, yet protect the sovereign rights of the 13 colonies, now called states.
Given the regional nature of the US and the differing political philosophies of the two parties, each presidential candidate has a natural base and certain regions to work with.
For John Kerry, he has the north-east corridor and progressive coasts while Bush has strength in the confederacy, the deep south, the old west and the farm belt.
The areas up for grabs are Appalachia, the industrial north, and the upper Mississippi basin.
Kerry's strategy has targeted all three battleground regions as well as the confederacy, where his strategy consists of picking John Edwards as his vice-presidential candidate.
The Kerry strategy depends on a large turnout by African Americans, who normally vote overwhelmingly Democratic, and on Edwards to attract enough white votes. If it works, he will be able to win Virginia and North Carolina.
Appalachia matters
Kerry has also focused on his military record in order to win additional voters in regions that have higher than average veteran populations.
These include the confederacy, Appalachia, the old west and the deep south. Although he only gets a chance in Appalachia, his goal is to gain enough votes from these regions to give him a greater hold in states that include two or more regions.
The best opportunity for Kerry is the industrial north, which is a union stronghold and has seen loss of jobs under the Bush administration.
Although the industrial north is not dominated by any state, it is a powerful enough region that can affect the results in the battleground states of Michigan and Ohio.
However, in order to win these two states, Kerry must connect more with farm belt voters to neutralise the Bush advantage there.
As a result, he will try to shape his message and focus on values, religion and gun ownership, especially when he is in the farm belt area.
Value issues
The traditional values, religion and gun-ownership themes will also connect with another critical region - the upper Mississippi basin.
It is likely the Kerry campaign will focus on these value issues in Ohio, Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin.
Among these themes, gun ownership will also help in Appalachia.
Although most Appalachian states may go for Bush, Pennsylvania and West Virginia could stay in the Democratic fold if Kerry comes across as pro-gun and gun control issues are not addressed as a Kerry priority.
It can be assumed that Kerry will focus less on traditional Democratic issues in this election and focus more on values issues, which resonate more with these regions' voters.
Bush's strategy will be to counter the values campaign of Kerry, but will also address issues that will appeal to specific regions and solidify his support in the traditional Republican strongholds.
Key battlegrounds
The head-to-head values battleground will be fought in Ohio, Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin. Bush is likely to focus on his pro-gun legislation, his support for a definition of marriage amendment, and his religious faith.
He is likely to call attention to Kerry's Senate voting record to paint his opponent as a liberal.
He will use his stand on mining and his administration's support for less regulation on federal lands to attract support in the Appalachian region and strengthen his support in the old west, considered solidly Republican.
There, Bush can attempt to counter the pro-Democratic progressive coast in Oregon, which poses an uphill battle for him.
If he can energise the old west voter base enough or nullify the Kerry advantage in the west, he can win Oregon.
Jews and Hispanics
Although the industrial north will probably go Democratic, Bush is hoping that an improved economy and the gun issue will attract enough voters from his farm belt base to win Ohio and Michigan.
He is also hoping that his support of Israel will cancel out the natural Democratic advantage with the Jewish bloc and give him an advantage in Florida, where the Jewish vote was critical in keeping the election close in 2000.
Another priority of the Bush campaign is securing the Hispanic vote.
Bush's percentage of the Hispanic vote, both as a governor and president, has been above the Republican average. The Hispanic voter is values-focused (but not pro-gun ownership), and some reports suggest that the second and third-generation Hispanics are more willing to vote Republican.
This voting bloc can be critical in winning New Mexico, which is nearly half Hispanic and went to Al Gore in the 2000 election by just a few hundred votes.
Other issues
There are also other issues that may affect the election. In California, the popularity of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger may help Bush, especially if the governor campaigns actively for the president.
There are also some other issues that may have different implications in various regions of the US. Some of these are:
Iraq war: While polls show that the war is unpopular in regions such as the north-east corridor and the progressive coast, some popularity remains in conservative areas such as the deep south and the confederacy, areas which also provide a larger number of soldiers to the military than other regions.
Consequently, how these regions will react to good or bad news from the battlefront will differ.
If the US does experience many casualties during the rest of the campaign and the Iraqi interim government continues to appear ineffective (and following US dictum), Bush will be seen as losing the war, which is the cornerstone of his re-election campaign.
The Bush administration's decision to maintain a low profile in Iraq since 28 June is an indication of its tactic to shield voters from the effect of continued failure of its policy in Iraq.
Arab-Israeli conflict: The fact is that this issue has been ignored by both the presidential candidates. Both are more inclined to straddle the fence in order to win the Jewish vote (which will be critical in Florida) and the Arab American vote (which will be important in the battleground state of Michigan).
War on terror: This remains a critical issue to Americans and polls show that Bush retains a modest lead over Kerry in terms of who is better to lead the country in the area of national security. This has caused the Democrats some concern, which led them to redirect their campaign and focus heavily on Kerry's military credentials.
The "terrorism" issue remains the wild card in the campaign. Bush has an advantage because as the president he can take action on homeland security and utilise the national security apparatus during the rest of the campaign. He will seek to portray Kerry as soft on terrorism while Kerry will accuse Bush of manipulating the use of national security alerts to score with voters.
Unemployment and economy: Bush will seek to use the appearance of a marginal improvement in the economy as a sign of a successful economic policy. On the other hand, Kerry will continue to focus on the loss of jobs and the high overall unemployment rate.
Economic issues will be of great importance in the industrial north, where unemployment remains high in many major industries. The actual state of the economy on the date of the election, therefore, could have an impact in several battleground states such as Ohio and Michigan.
Taxes: Kerry has voiced support for rolling back some of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% of the population and has cited the failure of Bush policies regarding the record-high deficits. Bush contends that his tax cuts will benefit small business owners and create more jobs.
Health care: Health care, along with social security, is of more importance to elderly Americans who are concentrated in Appalachia and the progressive coast and are more responsive to this campaign issue. It's also critical in the battleground state of Pennsylvania, which has the highest average age of any state population.
Veterans and national defence: Kerry will continue to use his military experience in Vietnam to attract veterans to his side, whose normal tendency is to vote Republican. Some polls show that veterans remain slightly pro-Bush by a 10% margin over Kerry.
The Republicans will try to portray Kerry as weak on defence, while Kerry will concentrate on his slogan, "Stronger at home, more respected in the world".
Bush will continue to justify his doctrine of pre-emptive war while Kerry will emphasise the need for multilateral action and building coalitions with allies.
Predictions
It is hard to predict this election in light of the 2000 experience and the latest polls that shows a dead-heat competition. The race remains tight and the electorate has yet to become fully engaged.
It is unconventional wisdom for an analyst to predict an outcome as of now. While noting the significance of the latest presidential debates in which Kerry received some needed momentum, it was my assessment weeks ago that Kerry would probably win over enough voters to be elected president ending up gaining 298 electoral college votes.
I am venturing into dangerous territory of political imprudence by predicting the election's outcome, but I feel a certain obligation as an analyst to offer my insight as I see the situation now.
I am prepared to update my assessment as the election draws nearer, regardless of my current prediction.
Many of the currently undecided voters may or may not vote in November, which will place great emphasis on voter turnout.
Negative campaign
Many signs in both camps exhibit vigorous grassroots efforts to pull the vote, with the lesson lingering from the 2000 election that every vote indeed counts. This could be very critical again in Florida.
Assuming that nothing dramatic happens in Iraq and Afghanistan, Bush may maintain a small gain in some polls relating to the war on terrorism, but Kerry may pull ahead by several points in most polls dealing with domestic and international agendas.
As the final campaign kicks in, we can see more Republican advertising trying to negatively portray Kerry's voting record in the Senate, while Democratic adverts are hammering Bush's deceptions to the American people and his decision to divert the war efforts from al-Qaida to Iraq.
The latest damaging reports from the CIA, chief US weapon inspector in Iraq and the criticism of Paul Bremer regarding the size of troops on the ground, will undoubtedly reinforce Kerry's position and provide him with needed ammunition to attack Bush.
However, in the end, the battleground will remain in the American heartland. Voters' perceptions in regions such as the upper Mississippi basin and Appalachia, as well as voter turnout in the industrial north and the farm belt, will decide the next president.
There are many signs of voters shifting towards the Democratic side but the question remains, will it be enough to guarantee a Kerry victory?"
Mounzer Sleiman is a Washington-based senior political-military analyst with expertise in US national security affairs
ppman
And I read it in al-Jazeera!
"The US electoral process, which uses an electoral college instead of a popular vote to determine the winning candidate, has given the US two recent presidents (Clinton and Bush) who earned less than a majority of the popular vote.
It also caused confusion in 2000 during the Florida recount. Yet, it has forced successful presidential candidates to craft nationwide campaigns based on regional considerations rather than merely focusing on the number of votes.
Winning strategy
By understanding the electoral college process, the rest of the world can better understand how US presidents forge a winning national strategy and how national policy is developed.
It also explains how some issues such as gun control and farm subsidies must be addressed by presidential candidates in order to win, while policy towards the Middle East is usually ignored.
In that regard, understanding the US electoral process means understanding how best to influence US policy.
The US electoral process was developed as a result of the political realities in America in 1776. The American War of Independence against Britain wasn't a war of a unified American nation, but a war by 13 sovereign colonies, who had given limited powers to a Continental Congress.
When the 13 colonies defeated the British in 1781, each colony maintained a military and printed its own money. This left the central government with little real power.
Differing philosophies
Consequently, there was a need to craft a constitution that would give the American central government more power, yet protect the sovereign rights of the 13 colonies, now called states.
Given the regional nature of the US and the differing political philosophies of the two parties, each presidential candidate has a natural base and certain regions to work with.
For John Kerry, he has the north-east corridor and progressive coasts while Bush has strength in the confederacy, the deep south, the old west and the farm belt.
The areas up for grabs are Appalachia, the industrial north, and the upper Mississippi basin.
Kerry's strategy has targeted all three battleground regions as well as the confederacy, where his strategy consists of picking John Edwards as his vice-presidential candidate.
The Kerry strategy depends on a large turnout by African Americans, who normally vote overwhelmingly Democratic, and on Edwards to attract enough white votes. If it works, he will be able to win Virginia and North Carolina.
Appalachia matters
Kerry has also focused on his military record in order to win additional voters in regions that have higher than average veteran populations.
These include the confederacy, Appalachia, the old west and the deep south. Although he only gets a chance in Appalachia, his goal is to gain enough votes from these regions to give him a greater hold in states that include two or more regions.
The best opportunity for Kerry is the industrial north, which is a union stronghold and has seen loss of jobs under the Bush administration.
Although the industrial north is not dominated by any state, it is a powerful enough region that can affect the results in the battleground states of Michigan and Ohio.
However, in order to win these two states, Kerry must connect more with farm belt voters to neutralise the Bush advantage there.
As a result, he will try to shape his message and focus on values, religion and gun ownership, especially when he is in the farm belt area.
Value issues
The traditional values, religion and gun-ownership themes will also connect with another critical region - the upper Mississippi basin.
It is likely the Kerry campaign will focus on these value issues in Ohio, Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin.
Among these themes, gun ownership will also help in Appalachia.
Although most Appalachian states may go for Bush, Pennsylvania and West Virginia could stay in the Democratic fold if Kerry comes across as pro-gun and gun control issues are not addressed as a Kerry priority.
It can be assumed that Kerry will focus less on traditional Democratic issues in this election and focus more on values issues, which resonate more with these regions' voters.
Bush's strategy will be to counter the values campaign of Kerry, but will also address issues that will appeal to specific regions and solidify his support in the traditional Republican strongholds.
Key battlegrounds
The head-to-head values battleground will be fought in Ohio, Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin. Bush is likely to focus on his pro-gun legislation, his support for a definition of marriage amendment, and his religious faith.
He is likely to call attention to Kerry's Senate voting record to paint his opponent as a liberal.
He will use his stand on mining and his administration's support for less regulation on federal lands to attract support in the Appalachian region and strengthen his support in the old west, considered solidly Republican.
There, Bush can attempt to counter the pro-Democratic progressive coast in Oregon, which poses an uphill battle for him.
If he can energise the old west voter base enough or nullify the Kerry advantage in the west, he can win Oregon.
Jews and Hispanics
Although the industrial north will probably go Democratic, Bush is hoping that an improved economy and the gun issue will attract enough voters from his farm belt base to win Ohio and Michigan.
He is also hoping that his support of Israel will cancel out the natural Democratic advantage with the Jewish bloc and give him an advantage in Florida, where the Jewish vote was critical in keeping the election close in 2000.
Another priority of the Bush campaign is securing the Hispanic vote.
Bush's percentage of the Hispanic vote, both as a governor and president, has been above the Republican average. The Hispanic voter is values-focused (but not pro-gun ownership), and some reports suggest that the second and third-generation Hispanics are more willing to vote Republican.
This voting bloc can be critical in winning New Mexico, which is nearly half Hispanic and went to Al Gore in the 2000 election by just a few hundred votes.
Other issues
There are also other issues that may affect the election. In California, the popularity of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger may help Bush, especially if the governor campaigns actively for the president.
There are also some other issues that may have different implications in various regions of the US. Some of these are:
Iraq war: While polls show that the war is unpopular in regions such as the north-east corridor and the progressive coast, some popularity remains in conservative areas such as the deep south and the confederacy, areas which also provide a larger number of soldiers to the military than other regions.
Consequently, how these regions will react to good or bad news from the battlefront will differ.
If the US does experience many casualties during the rest of the campaign and the Iraqi interim government continues to appear ineffective (and following US dictum), Bush will be seen as losing the war, which is the cornerstone of his re-election campaign.
The Bush administration's decision to maintain a low profile in Iraq since 28 June is an indication of its tactic to shield voters from the effect of continued failure of its policy in Iraq.
Arab-Israeli conflict: The fact is that this issue has been ignored by both the presidential candidates. Both are more inclined to straddle the fence in order to win the Jewish vote (which will be critical in Florida) and the Arab American vote (which will be important in the battleground state of Michigan).
War on terror: This remains a critical issue to Americans and polls show that Bush retains a modest lead over Kerry in terms of who is better to lead the country in the area of national security. This has caused the Democrats some concern, which led them to redirect their campaign and focus heavily on Kerry's military credentials.
The "terrorism" issue remains the wild card in the campaign. Bush has an advantage because as the president he can take action on homeland security and utilise the national security apparatus during the rest of the campaign. He will seek to portray Kerry as soft on terrorism while Kerry will accuse Bush of manipulating the use of national security alerts to score with voters.
Unemployment and economy: Bush will seek to use the appearance of a marginal improvement in the economy as a sign of a successful economic policy. On the other hand, Kerry will continue to focus on the loss of jobs and the high overall unemployment rate.
Economic issues will be of great importance in the industrial north, where unemployment remains high in many major industries. The actual state of the economy on the date of the election, therefore, could have an impact in several battleground states such as Ohio and Michigan.
Taxes: Kerry has voiced support for rolling back some of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% of the population and has cited the failure of Bush policies regarding the record-high deficits. Bush contends that his tax cuts will benefit small business owners and create more jobs.
Health care: Health care, along with social security, is of more importance to elderly Americans who are concentrated in Appalachia and the progressive coast and are more responsive to this campaign issue. It's also critical in the battleground state of Pennsylvania, which has the highest average age of any state population.
Veterans and national defence: Kerry will continue to use his military experience in Vietnam to attract veterans to his side, whose normal tendency is to vote Republican. Some polls show that veterans remain slightly pro-Bush by a 10% margin over Kerry.
The Republicans will try to portray Kerry as weak on defence, while Kerry will concentrate on his slogan, "Stronger at home, more respected in the world".
Bush will continue to justify his doctrine of pre-emptive war while Kerry will emphasise the need for multilateral action and building coalitions with allies.
Predictions
It is hard to predict this election in light of the 2000 experience and the latest polls that shows a dead-heat competition. The race remains tight and the electorate has yet to become fully engaged.
It is unconventional wisdom for an analyst to predict an outcome as of now. While noting the significance of the latest presidential debates in which Kerry received some needed momentum, it was my assessment weeks ago that Kerry would probably win over enough voters to be elected president ending up gaining 298 electoral college votes.
I am venturing into dangerous territory of political imprudence by predicting the election's outcome, but I feel a certain obligation as an analyst to offer my insight as I see the situation now.
I am prepared to update my assessment as the election draws nearer, regardless of my current prediction.
Many of the currently undecided voters may or may not vote in November, which will place great emphasis on voter turnout.
Negative campaign
Many signs in both camps exhibit vigorous grassroots efforts to pull the vote, with the lesson lingering from the 2000 election that every vote indeed counts. This could be very critical again in Florida.
Assuming that nothing dramatic happens in Iraq and Afghanistan, Bush may maintain a small gain in some polls relating to the war on terrorism, but Kerry may pull ahead by several points in most polls dealing with domestic and international agendas.
As the final campaign kicks in, we can see more Republican advertising trying to negatively portray Kerry's voting record in the Senate, while Democratic adverts are hammering Bush's deceptions to the American people and his decision to divert the war efforts from al-Qaida to Iraq.
The latest damaging reports from the CIA, chief US weapon inspector in Iraq and the criticism of Paul Bremer regarding the size of troops on the ground, will undoubtedly reinforce Kerry's position and provide him with needed ammunition to attack Bush.
However, in the end, the battleground will remain in the American heartland. Voters' perceptions in regions such as the upper Mississippi basin and Appalachia, as well as voter turnout in the industrial north and the farm belt, will decide the next president.
There are many signs of voters shifting towards the Democratic side but the question remains, will it be enough to guarantee a Kerry victory?"
Mounzer Sleiman is a Washington-based senior political-military analyst with expertise in US national security affairs
ppman
....good article.
