Why was Clinton able to win the Presidential elections of 1992 and 1996? Clinton won the 1992 election, because Republicans could not forgive Bush after he broke his promise to not raise taxes. Bush also lost votes in the middle-class because he did not address the economy, and instead focused on foreign policy. Bush’s campaign raised doubts about Clinton’s character and personal life, however Clinton addressed these matters on national television, and focused his own campaign of the economy, an area that Bush failed to address. Clintons was an excellent campaigner and promised things such as healthcare and tax cuts.
Wilson’s ‘comfy and complacent’ campaign did play in role in deciding the 1970 election in favour of the Conservatives but it was only a minor one. Much more important was the combination of mistrust by the public over Labour’s ability to control the economy and most importantly; Labour’s complete failure to control the Trade Unions and the fears that this brought with it. Even a Labour minister himself, Richard Crossman admits in Source C that a ‘final warning on the trade figures’ put voters off. Whilst Source A does attack Wilson for his ‘highly personalised campaign’ and his ‘presidential’ style leadership, it goes on to suggest that there is no clear reason for why people changed their minds and voted Tory at the last minute. Despite his ‘too relaxed and assured’ campaign Wilson was not to blame but instead it was a combination of ‘unfavourable trade figures’ and Enoch Powell that swung the vote.
During this time period, the Republican presidents managed to obtain a good economy and managed to improve it which would lead to more Republicans being elected in the future. The economy was an important reason for why Nixon got re-elected in 1972 as from 1971, he pursued a New Economic Policy which temporarily froze wages and devalued the dollar which was a popular policy and gained a 75% approval rating. This would have meant that the workers would have voted for the Republican’s as they would have wanted a high value for the amount of money that they earned. In 1980, Jimmy Carter was defeated and the economy would have played a big role in this loss as 63% of Americans felt that inflation was the biggest concern and Carter tried to decrease government spending but this was unpopular with Congress and Labour Unions. Because of this, there was 8.2% unemployment in 1980 which would have been unpopular with many American citizens and if the economy was better there would have been a greater chance of Carter being re-elected, but as the economy was bad many Americans
The federal government attempted to fix the economic problems through costly economic stimulus packages, which only resulted in further national debt. So one would have to ask if the fiscal policy the government is currently using is working. Many economist say America is suffering from debt deflation. Americans are trying to pay down debt by spending less, but this is causing their debt problems to worsen. Economists believe that government spending should rise temporarily so the drop in private spending can repair itself.
With this in mind, Barack Obama and John McCain both have many similar views on this topic. The economy is surprisingly America’s number one concern for the upcoming year, and both nominees are striving for votes. Both want to do what is best for the country, like lower gas prices, give jobs back to millions of Americans, and make lives better for the average middle class working family. Obama and McCain would both like to expand unemployment benefits making those who lost their jobs better off. Each of them plans to provide for the jobless and make room for many more opportunities of employment.
The rise of the Labour party was a crucial factor for the drive of reform for the Liberal party. The new Labour Party promised social reform and the Liberals were worried about losing votes. Reform could therefore be seen as a rather selfish, political advantageous response to political change. Since 1884, most working class men had the vote and the Liberals wanted to attract those votes. So therefore it was for their own political advantage of the Liberal government to offer social reform, even if they did not fully believe in the principle of government intervention in people’s everyday lives.
The reduction by 56 of Rotten and Pocket boroughs meant that significant amounts of Tory voters were lost therefore benefitting the Whigs all the more and increasing Whig popularity, this supplied Whig’s with the confidence to make more reforms, The reforms were subtle yet they carried an air of optimism and granted the working class people the chance to anticipate further future reforms. Before the act was passed the vote was spread unevenly over the country, certain constituencies were granted the vote for absurd reasons that followed old medieval tradition. Examples of these were the Pot Walloped tradition that entitled anyone that had a fireplace big enough to hang a pot was approved the right to vote. Also, Scot and Lot boroughs meant that everyone within the borough had the right to vote. These anachronisms meant that the vote was an unbalanced system that was in dia need of reform.
A simple example of this is the concept of that evil, deceptive tax cut. That same party will tell you that the only way to make money from taxes is to raise them until every rich patron of this country is paying an arm and a leg just to stay alive. Not only does this punish the rich for being rich, it is a form of socialism though it's redistribution of money in an attempt to reward the idle for doing nothing, and punish the busy for endeavoring to make money. Doesn't make much sense does
Anything that goes against what the corporate powers that be is demonized and twisted into a different form through their media outlets to create something that the ill-informed will swallow it no questions asked. Anyone that speaks out against what is obviously wrong with the system is turned into an enemy, while the one’s violating our rights and freedoms are treated like benevolent kings. Recently there have been many successful efforts to subjugate the poorer voters in this country. These measures have passed and it will become difficult for poorer and elderly people to vote in this country. The reason for this is simple, poor people and minorities are more likely to vote for Obama in the coming election and they have more numbers than those that will not.
Obama urged Congress to raise the minimum wage from the current $ 7.25 per hour to $ 9 per hour. The advantages of this point are to reduce poverty and improve the phenomenon of low wages. However, the minimum wages increased by 24% will lead to the increase in labor supply, reduced demand and cause large unemployment. Thus, it might occur that a phenomenon of low-wage improvement, but the unemployment rate is correspondingly increased. What make matters worse is that unemployment is the most vulnerable to afford unemployment hit.