It is usual to establish gradations between electors and elected, for example, the US President is elected by the electoral college, and the Westminster system, the Prime Minister is formally appointed by the "head of state" (where actually chosen by the parliament or by his own party). Generally direct elections and those with degrees have similar second election results (Illinois elections 2014).
However, in some cases electoral systems allow election of candidates who receive the highest number of popular votes; a recent example being the American election of 2000 where he was elected President George W. Bush. A phenomenon much discussed today is the relevance of immediate presidential reelection, with supporters and opponents at all levels.
A mechanism that alters the handling equality is concerned about the size and distribution of electoral boundaries (gerrymandering, rotten boroughs). If popular sovereignty is recognized, all the people have the right both to vote (when everyone can vote, talk of universal suffrage, if not restricted suffrage) and to stand for election (all have to be elected). Sometimes the law provides for circumstances in which the right to vote or requirements of different nature for its exercise is lost; limitations which in some cases can become so abusive that distort the results electoral.
Positively competence to participate may result from a general and inalienable right, or result from matter jurisdiction or the result of a skill of delegation. Negatively incompetence to participate may result from the state or quality of a person, pursuant to a settlement or use. This question of jurisdiction directly determines the right to register on electoral lists.
In the cities of antiquity, election is originally a concept and a practice aristocratic; the selection of members of people for the exercise of judicial office ("Commander") is normally done by lottery, not by vote or election. Thus, at the time the aristocratic Athenian king "chosen large families." In the democratic era, the rulers forming the equivalent of executive of our governments and members of (People's Court) are drawn.
Much of the story of the election is about the struggle to promote voting and excluded groups. The women's suffrage movement gave women in many countries the right to vote, and the assurance of the right to free election was the most successful African-American Civil Rights Movement. The extension of voting rights to other groups remain excluded in some places (such as those convicted of felony, members of certain minorities and economically disadvantaged) continues to be a significant target for electoral rights.
With the challenge of monarchical legitimacy and particularly that of absolute monarchy, the Enlightenment and the rise of liberalism in its many forms (philosophical, political, economic etc.) leads to reintroduce and reworking the concept of election . These movements of ideas give rise to practices that now form the basis of our democratic institutions.
Thus, national sovereignty is thought of as not being able to be exercised directly or through freely chosen representatives, so elected. Thus, unless a direct democracy, the exercise of democracy is confused with that of representative democracy. Whenever the choices available to a group of people reflect a plurality -except to admit precedence under the doctrinaire or the law of Fort the need to decide between several different options or different raises the question of how decision.
However, in some cases electoral systems allow election of candidates who receive the highest number of popular votes; a recent example being the American election of 2000 where he was elected President George W. Bush. A phenomenon much discussed today is the relevance of immediate presidential reelection, with supporters and opponents at all levels.
A mechanism that alters the handling equality is concerned about the size and distribution of electoral boundaries (gerrymandering, rotten boroughs). If popular sovereignty is recognized, all the people have the right both to vote (when everyone can vote, talk of universal suffrage, if not restricted suffrage) and to stand for election (all have to be elected). Sometimes the law provides for circumstances in which the right to vote or requirements of different nature for its exercise is lost; limitations which in some cases can become so abusive that distort the results electoral.
Positively competence to participate may result from a general and inalienable right, or result from matter jurisdiction or the result of a skill of delegation. Negatively incompetence to participate may result from the state or quality of a person, pursuant to a settlement or use. This question of jurisdiction directly determines the right to register on electoral lists.
In the cities of antiquity, election is originally a concept and a practice aristocratic; the selection of members of people for the exercise of judicial office ("Commander") is normally done by lottery, not by vote or election. Thus, at the time the aristocratic Athenian king "chosen large families." In the democratic era, the rulers forming the equivalent of executive of our governments and members of (People's Court) are drawn.
Much of the story of the election is about the struggle to promote voting and excluded groups. The women's suffrage movement gave women in many countries the right to vote, and the assurance of the right to free election was the most successful African-American Civil Rights Movement. The extension of voting rights to other groups remain excluded in some places (such as those convicted of felony, members of certain minorities and economically disadvantaged) continues to be a significant target for electoral rights.
With the challenge of monarchical legitimacy and particularly that of absolute monarchy, the Enlightenment and the rise of liberalism in its many forms (philosophical, political, economic etc.) leads to reintroduce and reworking the concept of election . These movements of ideas give rise to practices that now form the basis of our democratic institutions.
Thus, national sovereignty is thought of as not being able to be exercised directly or through freely chosen representatives, so elected. Thus, unless a direct democracy, the exercise of democracy is confused with that of representative democracy. Whenever the choices available to a group of people reflect a plurality -except to admit precedence under the doctrinaire or the law of Fort the need to decide between several different options or different raises the question of how decision.
About the Author:
If you plan to vote in the Illinois elections 2014 check out Brannigan for Congress. See the difference that Sharon Brannigan will make, when you visit us online today at http://www.branniganforcongress.com.