'Safe State vs. Swing State\r'

'Ben Mason Eng. 1001 sect. 38 9/26/12 The Voting resort argona: Play it impregnable? Or drop down? This is a concern that arises for presidential outlooks every four days as we approach presidential elections. First, there be both terms to be recognized: â€Å" secure state” and â€Å" cutting off state”. In a â€Å" secure state” the presidential candidate of a situation party has the vast mass of leap out of that states selectrs, regularly, so that he/she can safely adopt the favorable outcome of the states electoral college votes. Some ell- cognize safe states are atomic n cocoa 20 for democrats, and Texas for republicans. On the contrary, there are states that are not like safe states and no single candidate or party has fire support of the votes. These are called â€Å" gash states” or â€Å" field of operations states”. Some examples of swing states of this election are Florida, Iowa, Colorado, and new(prenominal)s. In the voting world, the president is concluded through congressman votes by the states. This is called the electoral college. A presidential candidate needs 270 electoral votes to win the election. For 48 states, it is a inner-takes-all election which means that whichever candidate receives a majority of the universal vote, or a plurality of the popular vote (less than 50 percent but a great deal than any other candidate), takes all of the states electoral votes. Maine and northeastward are the only states that use a comparative vote system. In these states, there could be a split of electoral votes among candidates. (Dugan) The electoral college plays a bulky exercise on the topic of safe states and swing states by effecting the behaviors of presidential candidates. For in military capability, safe states that re known to vote a authorized way entrust not receive near as much attention or campaign as swing states during the times close to elections. This is why candidates fight oer s wing states that may only swallow as little as 4 electoral votes, instead of fighting for states with a lot more. (Dugan) An example of this would be Romney and Obama spending large amounts of money campaigning in a swing state such as Iowa with 7 electoral votes and very little in a safe state like California with 55 electoral votes. (Politico) Candidates do not edit a lot of effort into afe states because it is unlikely that he/she can change the minds of the mess there. Also, one allow for not spend time and money campaigning in safe states because he/she may already have the support of the large number in those states. As you can see, the electoral college is key to understanding how safe states and swing states work. There is a kind of two party dictatorship in todays American political sympathies and the vast majority of voters fall into these two categories or parties: Republican or Democratic. Every election stop there are two candidates unning for these parties. In determine for the candidate to get the vote of a position state he/she must run a campaign. The aggressiveness and frequency of the campaigns might vary callable to the status of a partys influence over certain states. Sometimes the candidates have to modify there stance or ideals on certain issues to fit to that particular state. An example would be that some candidates may wishing to position themselves to stir to a certain cultural group of that area. Obama has tried to appeal to the Hispanic vote in Colorado due to the growing umber of Hispanic immigrants. (Larcinese) This may be a keen move because he is usually popular among nonage groups. In return, Romney has tried to address people in rural areas. Recent polls show that he is 14 percent more popular with people in rural areas than Obama is. (Gruber) Also, issues that are a freehanded concern in an area may be emphasized. Things like restoring the health of a declining ecosystem may be brought up in an area that is su ffering from disforestation or pollution to secure the votes of people come to approximately that subject.Other factors play into campaigning in swing states as well. Many times instead of stretchability the truth, a candidate will just miscarry to bring up the matter, whatever it may be. The sensitive issues of a certain state might be avoided in order to sound better on a vague level. Slogans are made brief and vague for this reason to get anyone to jump on the band wagon. Making the issues fit the political views of the people in a certain area or background is imperative to getting favorable votes. Candidates do whatever it takes to look good or appeal to people.This sometimes means mud-slinging or making the debate candidate look bad. This has been going on since the rise of presidential runoffs. A great example of this would be â€Å"Romneys war on women” as said by Obama because of Mitt Romneys stance on issues for women. This gives the allusion that Romney doe snt care about womens health issues so that Obama would be favorable to women. (Politico) In return, Mitt Romney has attacked Obamas healthcare plan saying that Obama fashion cover people with preexisting conditions. This is an ongoing intimacy that will never stop.There will always be differences in views that candidates will trash each other with. There are a vast run of ways to advertise to capture the hearts and minds of manque voters. The key to it all is appealing to the people that have the most stake in the situation and convincing them to vote a certain way to decide the victor of the presidential race. As you can see, the role of swing states and safe state are authoritative to how things are done and the way that American government activity play out. Works Cited Larcinese, Valentino. â€Å"Allocating the U. S. Federal Budget to the States. The journal of Politics. Wiley Library. , 27 Apr 2006. Web. Vol. 68 May 2006 Gruber, Jonathan. â€Å"Rural regard and Pollsà ¢â‚¬Â Hastings Center Report. Wiley Library. , 8 Feb 2012. , Sep,Oct 2006 Politico. org. , â€Å"News, Analysis, Candidates, and Polls. ” current Clear Polls. Swing state view. , Sep 26 2012 archive. fairvote. org/e_college. htm. , â€Å"Maine and Nebraska. ” â€Å"Center for voting and Democracy. ”, copyright 2002. , Dec 10 2009 Dugan, Andrew. Gallup. com/poll/swingstate. htm. , â€Å"Swing State Voters. ” Washington D. C. , â€Å" public life Track 2012” Sep 9 2012\r\n'