A2-AQA GOV4A Politics 10th June 2013

Oh okay so who do Tea Party members vote for in national elections or are they mostly independent voters? Could you say that the influence of the tea party has caused the Republicans to be a more right wing party causing greater differences between the Democrats and Republicans rather than wihin parties

Burger himself was quite conservative, but he inherited the Warren Court, which was relatively liberal, so there was a preference to activism in the early years (Roe v Wade (1973)). It started to become more conservative though, as with the exception of Carter (who had no nominations to the SC anyway), there was 20 years of Republican Presidents (Nixon from 68 to Bush Sr to 92). In Bowers v Hardwick (1986) the Burger Court upheld a Georgia state law that made sodomy between to consenting homosexuals illegal (restraint). As a result, when Rehnquist took over, the court had strong preference for restraint, even when it conflicted with the personal beliefs of many of the justices. In 2000, in Stenburg v Carhart, they overturned a Nebraska state law banning D&X (partial birth) abortions. This looks like activism, but the SC had the opportunity to partially overturn Roe, which they didn't do. Also in 2000, in Dickerson v US they had the opportunity to overturn Miranda v Arizona (which most conservatives detested), but didn't because it had become so established.

Hope this helps, and good luck in the exam!


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

I'm so scared for this exam. I wish we had unit 4A first...
Good luck everyone!

Saw your message for Split ticket voting couldn't really find a resource for it I learnt it from my textbook it is not really that hard

For example if there is a question like Why do some voters split their ticket when voting in US elections and what are the
consequences of such behaviour? (30 marks)

You would first define split ticket voting: They may note the paradoxical nature of STV as some voters are
apparently voting for two different parties on the same ballot paper at the same election

Then you would reasons why they use STV

1) Issue voting - Many candidates vote for candidates due to the issue. This is a reason why they use STV. For example in 2004 many Catholitcs voted for Bush (52%) You can also find other examples e.g. due to the big tent system many voters will not be fully aligned to their party e.g. someone who is a Moderate Republican living in Maine may vote for a Democratic candidate because they believe in e.g. big spending, pro choice etc... Likewise same can be argued for a Conservative Democratic e.g. In the South they may have voted for Mccain in 2008 perhaps due to his policies on economy , small government spending etc... Synoptic link many people in UK vote on issues e.g. 2010 election many voted Cameron due to his economic policies
2) Candidate centred issue - many of the voting is candidate centred. Always use this two examples to get you the highest marks. Obama in 2008 and Reagan in 1980 and 1984. 19% of Republicans used STV for Obama while 55% of Democrats STV for Reagan in 1980 and 1984. This is due to the fact they like their policies and what they have to offer many STV for Obama due to him being the better candidate than Mccain and being more charismatic while in 1980 and 1984 many Democrats liked Reagans economic rules and he was seen as very approachable.
3) You can also argue that many people STV for the incumbency factor. This is the idea that many vote for their HOuse of represenatives because of the pork barelling and benefit they get for their state. For example the candidate will increase their spending on the state e..g education, transport etc... Therefore thats why a voter will use STV because they want to keep that same person to gain the benefits for their states.

Finally consequences are divided government which has risen and this can lead to gridlock e.g. Clinton 1999 and Bush 2001 who had problems passing his education bills I think. However you can argue that you get a more stable government compared to the UK where executive dominance can lead to tyranny but strong divided government leads to less tyranny in the USA which the FF intended this helps avoid the whims of the day.
Another consequence is gaining the best of both worlds someone may benefit by their democrat congress e.g. providing healthcare and education due to inherent powers they have while they gain by their republican president say via lower taxes.

Conclusion: It is a very unique way very different from UK where we have straight ticket voting but it leads to more choice in the hope that more people vote however this does not always happen but you can argue that we have a more accountable government compared to the UK

Hope that helps if not read the mark scheme in more detail and I hope you do well
http://filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects/AQA-GOV3A-W-MS-JUN10.PDF

Does anyone know what neoliberalism and neoconservatism is? I was just reading the specification for Gov3A an it said we should know, but we haven't done it, or at least I can't remember. I've looked on the Internet but I can't find any definitive answer. Thanks in advance


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

I found this really interesting website where it has all the past papers from 2003 until 2008. PM me and I'll send you the link!

Please send the website.
do you know any possible questions?

I'm feeling okay on everything apart from split ticketing can someone help me!


Posted from TSR Mobile

Okay...split-ticket voting is when voters vote for candidates from different parties in the same election. For example, voting for a Democrat president, but a Republican congressman/woman or senator. There are a number of reasons why voters 'split their ticket':
1. Firstly, its because they can! Federalism and the separation of powers allows them to do so!
2. Secondly, it could be down to partisan de-alignment. Independent voters are more likely to split their ticket as they are not aligned with a certain party
3. Thirdly, it could be due to the influence of candidates or different issues. For example, in 1984 the Democrat candidate, Walter Mondale was very uninspiring - Reagan was a much better candidate. This led to 55% of registered Democrats splitting their ticket and voting for Reagan instead. They were nicknamed Reagan's Democrats.

An important consequence of split ticket voting is that it can lead to divided government. This can then result in gridlock, when legislation is constantly rejected in congress on partisan grounds.

However, split ticket voting does encourage voter choice and prevents an 'elective dictatorship'.

I'm feeling okay on everything apart from split ticketing can someone help me!


Posted from TSR Mobile

I don't understand how parties are weak and strengthening what are main points for this if an essay comes up

Also if a 10 mark comes on conservatism and liberalism what would you say?