Customer center

We are a boutique essay service, not a mass production custom writing factory. Let us create a perfect paper for you today!

Example research essay topic: Do Modern American Campaigns Advance Democracy - 1,996 words

NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote

Of course, campaigns are necessary in any democracy, whether they are simple or complex. Simple campaigns involve only the candidate giving a single speech or even a few speeches, but regardless a campaign still exists. In todays American sense, campaigns are a lot more complex. They involve primaries, conventions, numerous speeches, cross-country travel, and a humongous campaign staff. These campaigns are necessary because they inform the public of what candidates they are voting for in the upcoming elections. One of the main problems however is that sometimes these campaigns can be harmful to the democratic system.

No one doubts that they are necessary, since the public cannot vote blind; however, there is a debate about how much is necessary. Some of the aspects of a modern campaign may decrease an elections democratic aspects. However, the public has the choice to vote or not, and if a campaign turns them away, then that is a conscious choice. They are not forced to not vote, they have chosen to do it. Even if campaigns turn people away from voting, they still do not affect how democratic a government is. Campaigns advance democracy, because they give people a choice of what to do with their vote, and also show the voting public exactly who they are voting for.

One of the main arguments that campaigns decrease levels of democracy is the declining level of election turnout over the past few decades (Geer lecture). Turnout is right around fifty percent of the total population, and only seventy-five percent of those eligible voters who are registered. The argument states that campaigns are too long and that the negative ads, or attack ads, turn voters away from elections. The never-ending campaign is also a problem. Even though a president may have just started his term, parties talk about who their candidates for the next election will be as soon as the past election is over, which makes could possibly make voters disgusted in how parties get a candidate elected, then immediately look ahead. Another argument against modern campaigns are negative / attack ads.

These are ads in which one candidate attacks the others policies or morals and does not spend any time on their own policies. These ads can be completely negative and simply attack the morality of a candidate, which sometimes hurts the person who is doing the attacking. The percent of the public who thinks that these ads are not moral themselves are turned off to the candidate who made them. This results in people not wanting to vote simply because they are disgusted in the amount of mud-slinging that is occurring and are fed up with the immorality of politics. This is a good argument, yet it speaks nothing of campaigns making democracy regress. In fact, if people decide to not use their vote because of these two issues, it shows that the American public is making a conscious choice not to vote, not simply throwing their vote away.

This is an increase in democracy, because not only does it show how these things give voters more choices, but also shows that voters are educated and are taking an active role in government. Also, the reasons for declining turnout are not simply these two items. One problem with turnout is the amount of difficulty it takes to register to vote. Only two-thirds of the entire public is registered because the registration process is a long and sometimes expensive one, and it has to be done repeatedly if a voter moves or forgets to register for one election (Geer Lecture). Another problem facing low turnout is the attitude that one vote does not count, this has nothing to do with a campaign. Regardless, the level of turnout is acceptable anyway.

Fifty percent of a population would not be acceptable for a country with a very low population but is fifty percent is over one hundred million people, that level is perfectly acceptable. Studies show that the longer the campaign the more informed the public becomes. A more informed public makes better decisions because they vote for things that they believe in, other then one speech they hear or one ad they see. If a campaign lasts a year, that year is filled with learning about the election, which a lot of people use to decide their vote. Attack ads also increase voter knowledge.

Even though the knowledge is negative, they learn it better, as studies show (Geer lecture). These negative ads make people think and make people interested, and even if some people do not vote because of them, they are taking that stance. These ads also make elections more competitive and the more competitive and election the higher the voting rate, since a small number of votes matters more. So even though negative ads and too long of a campaign may cause less people to vote, it actually increases the level of democracy because the choice to not vote is made, but it is a choice. A solution to this problem may be to add a selection of no one on a ballot (Allen). Showing that a person has decided to vote, but has decided that they believe none of the candidates deserves the position.

The problem with this is that people would rather just stay home and know that they didnt waste their time to register and go to vote, simply to not vote for anyone. Why waste the time when its easier and just as effective to not go through it at all? The argument is that this way people will feel that they are involved in their government, but they can get this same feeling but not participating at all. Government will react more to fifty percent not voting, then to eighty percent voting and thirty percent voting for no one.

This action would not solve anything, because people wont want to waste their time for something they can do just as effectively without having to work. A long campaign increases the amount of information available to a voting public. Campaigns today include primaries in almost every state. This process allows people to decide what candidate will run for each major party, so it in effect allows people to hold two elections, one for a partys candidate and one for the actual office. Once this decision is made, many things take place. The parties hold debates, have party conventions, and the candidates make speeches to the public.

All of these factors contribute to a more knowledgeable public. It also eliminates people voting for a candidate simply because they like them more, even thought they know none of their policies. However, people can ignore all this information by changing the channel or turning the page. That also is a choice that people make, which is the heart of democracy.

If people choose to ignore all the information available to them, they choose to do that. Their choice is a vital part of democracy, if they choose to vote without looking at information, they still vote. Votes do not count more if they are educated or not, one vote is always one vote. The definition of an educated voter can also be debated. Is a voter educated because they know a lot or because they only know what is important to them? Voters can be educated in all different ways, depending on how they choose to be.

If a voter decides they want to know as many facts a possible; that is how they decide their vote. If a voter simply cares about certain issues and only learns the candidates positions on those; then they are also educated. Also, if a voter decides to not learn about anything, they are also educated to a satisfactory point for them. Todays campaigns are also less party-centered then in previous years (Nelson). They are showing a trend towards a candidate-centered approach.

There are no more ads and commercials for the Democratic Party, simply ads and commercials for the democratic candidate. So these actions lead to people voting in a less partisan fashion, if voters see a candidate they agree with, that candidate is less attached to the party itself. Even though a lot of people are still partisans, a lot of people just vote for candidates also. So the amount of information available to people just make them more and more educated to what they need in order to vote.

Some say this information overwhelms voters, but voters can simply ignore it if they want to. A lot of stereotypes are that politicians do not keep the promises they make during their campaigns. Studies show that politicians usually keep a majority (65 - 80 %) of the promises they make during a campaign (Geer lecture). If the majority of eligible voters knew that politicians kept the majority of their promises, this stereotype would disappear.

Without this stereotype more people would pay attention to what the candidates have to say, instead of passing it off as lies. If the public knew what the candidates were saying would be turned into actual law and policy, they may pay more attention to what is being said. This is not a negative result of a campaign, but a positive result that not many people know about. One negative aspect of campaigns is the amount of valence issues present.

When candidates say that they support things such as helping the poor or bettering education, no one is going to oppose them, which makes the candidates seem very alike. Even if the candidates all agree on these issues, what should be looked at is how they want to change it. Every voter wants to improve education, but not every voter supports school vouchers. These are the issues that the public should look at more, not just things at face value. If one candidate comes on and says that he supports improving the education system, no one is going to disagree with him. However, if he came on and stated that he wanted to improve education by letting foreign students read and be taught in their own language, then not everyone would believe he was correct.

Also some candidates hide things that they do and make it look a lot better on the surface. In the 2000 presidential election, for example, now-president Bush said that he had improved literacy in areas of Texas where the rates were previously incredibly low. However, when it was discovered that this had happened because Bush let Spanish-speaking students read in Spanish, and that was the reason for the increase in the literacy rate, this angle of Bush's campaign was dropped (Maisal). Sometimes these angles of issues are not discovered. And when they are, it creates the politician stereotype. Regardless, the campaign system in general increases the level of democracy in the United States.

It educates the public and lets them make a more educated decision on what to do with their vote. They have more choices due to the campaign process, and one of those choices is not to vote at all. Even if the campaigns decrease turnout, they do it because people are actively staying away from the polls. The debates that take place also show that the candidates are not exactly the same and let people see how they differ and whos policies they believe in more. The entire process allows voters to take the election as a whole and become educated in many different ways. They can know the history of the candidates and they can learn how the candidate feels about issues that affect their lives.

The entire process increases the amount of democracy in an election because it allows for more information and a greater amount of choice for voters. Works Cited Nelson, Candice J. Campaigns and Elections American Style. American University: Westview Press, 1995. Allen, Anita L.

Debating Democracy's Discontent. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998. Maisal, L. Sandy. The Parties Respond.

Boulder: Westview Press, 1998


Free research essays on topics related to: lot of people, entire process, fifty percent, one of the main, amount of information

Research essay sample on Do Modern American Campaigns Advance Democracy

Writing service prices per page

  • $18.85 - in 14 days
  • $19.95 - in 3 days
  • $23.95 - within 48 hours
  • $26.95 - within 24 hours
  • $29.95 - within 12 hours
  • $34.95 - within 6 hours
  • $39.95 - within 3 hours
  • Calculate total price

Our guarantee

  • 100% money back guarantee
  • plagiarism-free authentic works
  • completely confidential service
  • timely revisions until completely satisfied
  • 24/7 customer support
  • payments protected by PayPal

Secure payment

With EssayChief you get

  • Strict plagiarism detection regulations
  • 300+ words per page
  • Times New Roman font 12 pts, double-spaced
  • FREE abstract, outline, bibliography
  • Money back guarantee for missed deadline
  • Round-the-clock customer support
  • Complete anonymity of all our clients
  • Custom essays
  • Writing service

EssayChief can handle your

  • essays, term papers
  • book and movie reports
  • Power Point presentations
  • annotated bibliographies
  • theses, dissertations
  • exam preparations
  • editing and proofreading of your texts
  • academic ghostwriting of any kind

Free essay samples

Browse essays by topic:

Stay with EssayChief! We offer 10% discount to all our return customers. Once you place your order you will receive an email with the password. You can use this password for unlimited period and you can share it with your friends!

Academic ghostwriting

About us

© 2002-2024 EssayChief.com