Voter turnout decline in the 1988 American presidential election

American Democracy

Voter Turnout in 1988 American Presidential Election:

Democracy is for the people and by the people and it can be successful if people participate effectively in electing their representatives. In 1988, presidential elections were held in United States of America. Statistics shows that voter turnout for this presidential election was very low. Voter turnout was as low as 50.1%. In spite of an increasing trend of voter turnouts in the presidential election of 1948 and in the presidential elections of 1960, the voter turn out in 1988 decreased sharply to merely half of the population that are eligible for casting votes. The turnout was below the American presidential elections standard. Most of eligible candidates who did not cast their votes were supporters of Dukakis. If these people had cast their votes the situation would have been different for 1988 elections. It can also be said that 1988 presidential elections results was not the opinion of average people (Franklin, 2004).

1988 Election turnout as compared to other elections turnout:

United States of America is a symbol of democracy to the rest of the world. Citizens of United States participate in these elections in order to express their opinions as to who should be made representative of the people amongst them. Despite of being such an old and big democratic country the American voter turnouts for the presidential election has always been inconsistent. The overall voter turnout for 1988 presidential election was a little less to 1984 presidential elections. The amount of total vote casted in 1988 was 91,602,291 which if compared to 1984 was only a million votes less but as compared to 1984 elections but total voters as compared to 1984 declined by 13 million (Janda, Berry, Goldman, & Hula, 2012).

Previously before 1988 the voter turnout has already started increasing but this time it was all time low. Total registered voters for this year were 126,381,202 out of 182630000 which is 69.20% and the turnout was 91,594,693, which is 50.15%. For the next presidential elections in 1992 these figures increased to 55.23% which is far better then the previous year figure but then again in 1996 voter turnout again reduced by less then half of the population. This shows the inconsistency of voting turnout pattern for the American Elections.

Factors influencing the turnout for the 1988 elections:

The major factor that because of which the voting turnout was low was because of the fact that most of the American citizens preferred not to cast their votes sit back at home and enjoy as a result George Bush who never had an edge over Michael S. Dukakis won. The other factor that also played an important role and affected the turnout was the smart improvisation by George Bush team that made him win this election by attracting and convincing his voters to cast their votes in spite of being a weak contender to the Michael S. Dukakis he managed to win. They economy was rising and showed a stable growth which is a positive sign for any country which may have led people to worry less about casting their votes for presidential elections since all was well. On the other hand, we also see that the Soviet Union was crumbling putting United States of America and its fellow citizen in great peace of mind. Another reason due to which Michael S. Dukakis got less votes then George Bush was because George Bush promised not to put additional taxes, which was appreciated by everyone, and as a result, he won the 1988 presidential elections (Polsby, Wildavsky, & Schier, 2012).

The voting model for 1988 presidential elections:

The voting model for the 1988 American presidential elections seems to be Prospective voting model as in this type of model people decide the fate of the government by selecting the responsible parties. There was no unusual demographics pattern that effected the 1988 presidential elections which shows that people wanted the things to go smoothly as they were going previously.

Demographics pattern for 1988 elections:

When we see the demographics patterns, we see that both the majority of men and women who participated in the elections voted for George Bush. Majority of the votes casted by the Blacks and Hispanic were in favor of Michael S. Dukakis. While majority of the white voters voted for George Bush. Similarly, in all age groups we find that majority of them casted votes to George Bush. People who lie in income groups between less than dollar 12500 to people earning around 25000 dollars, majority of them voted for Michael S. Dukakis while the remaining income groups voted for George Bush. Similarly, majority of the liberal and moderate parties were in favor of Michael S. Dukakis while the conservatives were in favor of George Bush. Majority of the Democrats were in favor of Michael S. Dukakis while Republicans and Independent were in favor of George Bush. Thus, we can say that there was no unusual demographic pattern that played an important role in determining the result of 1988 American presidential elections (Welch, Gruhl, Comer, & Rigdon, 2010).

Total turnout of voters in the year 1996

In the year 1996, an extreme decline was noticed in the voter turnout rate of presidential elections. These turnout rates were falling since the start of 1960 and the most severe fall was recorded in the year 1960. Voting is the basic right of every citizen of the country but unfortunately, 1996 showed that the citizens were no more interested in this right. However, this reaction of the voters was extremely disappointing because during 1960s and 1970s many efforts were made by the government in order to remove those problems, which voters faced in the past. However, these efforts of the government showed no result because in spite of increasing the voter turnout rate it actually decreased with a high margin. In the year 1996, the youngsters of twenty-four years old were only thirty-percent. The voter turnout in this year was only forty -- nine percent, which are 96,277,634.

Comparison of the turnout rate of the year 1996 with the normal turnout rate of the presidential elections

The turnout rate of the 1996 elections was not similar with the normal voter turnouts because as mentioned above a severe decline in the turnout rate 3 was recorded ever. In the twentieth century, this low record was only recorded in the 1920 and 1924. The percentage of the voters in this year was almost negligible. In this year, Bill Clinton defeated a senator of United States, Bob Dole from Kansas (Welch, Gruhl, Comer, & Rigdon, 2010).

There were a number of valid reasons for low voter turnout in the 19th century such as low literacy rate, lack of awareness among people, existence of multiple barriers in the process of voting, registration system and so on. However, in the 20th century, almost all of these problems were removed and a high voter rate was expected in the 20th century but unfortunately the voter rate in some of the years of the 20th century was very low and the year 1996 was one of those years. The reasons for this low voter turnout in this year as described below:

Reasons for the low voter turnout in the year 1996

Since the voter rate shocked everyone, therefore a survey was conducted in order to know the reasons of this low turnout rate. Many people in the survey said that they had a busy life and taking out time from other activities, which are not included in their schedule, was quite difficult for them. Beside this, some of the people gave reasons that they were ill or disabled, some said that the candidate this time was not of their interest therefore they did not vote and some gave family reasons for not voting. In addition to this, some people said that they had transportation problem and some were out of town. The survey also reported that some people did not give any answer of the question and some answered that they do not have any interest in the voting process (Bardes, Shelley, II, & Schmidt, 2012).

The Presidential Elections of 1996 and the voting model

Prospective Voting Model

It is the model in which people vote for the candidate by predicting that how he will perform in the future.

Electoral Competition Model

It is a voting model in which voters vote for the median or the central political candidate.

Retrospective Model

It is a voting model in which the voters look at the former performance of the candidate and then give vote according to the performance in the past.

Based on these voting models, the presidential elections of the year 1996 is an electoral voting model and Bill Clinton was elected in this year (Franklin, 2004).

Influence of Demographic Factors in the Voter turnout Rate of the Year 1996

Demographic factors also play an essential role in the voting system and these factors affected the presidential elections of 1996. It was observed that the involvement of African-Americans in the elections started few years back and its affects started increasing year by year. In the year 1996, the registered white voters were around fifty-nine, black were around fifty-three, Hispanic were forty-four and Asians were forty-three. The lowest registration was only of the Asians.

Several surveys were conducted and it the results came out that the voters prefer those candidates who are similar to them in demographic terms. Besides this, some people often do not prefer to register in the voting process if he candidates are not similar to them demographically. This factor influenced the voter turnout of the 1996 elections in the United States (Janda, Berry, Goldman, & Hula, 2012).

Voter Turnout in the Presidential Elections of 2004

Factors that have influenced the voting turnout in the year 2004

America was involved in two wars, one with Afghanistan and the other war was with Iraq. If Bill Clinton was able to deal with the attack on the world war trade center, which was a USS Cole attack from the enemy, these wars can be easily avoided.

In addition to this fact, victory was faced from Iraq and this was a god move for America. Americans again standed firm against Iraq and the citizens of America realized this real fact, due to this the spirit of patriotism again roused in the hearts of citizens and due to this psychological reason, the turnout rate increased in this year. In addition to this, a number of efforts were made to spread awareness among the citizens about the significance of voting and the importance of their rights.

Model of the presidential elections of the year 2004

The analysis of the presidential elections of the year 2004 depicts that among the three major models, retrospective model, electoral model and prospective model described above in the paper, the elections of 2004 was a retrospective model. It is because of the fact that the citizens have considered the performance and role of Bush in the wars with Afghanistan as well as Iraq. This model was accurately used by the citizens to keep this candidate in the White house. Though John Kerry did a number of things in order to defeat Bush in the presidential elections, he used the power of speeches in order to motivate the citizens towards him but all his efforts turned into failure due to the critical analysis of the citizens. The voters recognized that the leader who can lead them and their country is only Bush (Wilson, Diiulio, Jr., & Bose, 2011).

Influence of the Demographic Factors in Choosing the Final Candidate For 2004

Motor Bill played a significant role in the elections of 2004. Clinton signed this bill in the year 1994 and this bill changed the demographics into many ways. According to this bill, a person who has a driver's license can vote. That person can be anyone but the only requirement for giving vote is the ownership of the driver's license. It was commonly observed that due to this bill, a number of felons, illegal aliens and non-citizens also take part in voting and as a result, the democrats gained a number of votes. However, in the year 2004, these were not highly available and because of a reason Kerry was unable to gain high number of votes as compared to Bush and as a result Bush was finally elected. (Franklin, 2004)

Similarities in voting turnouts for 1988, 1996 and 2004 elections:

Overall, if we analyze the 1988, 1996 and 2004 presidential elections we see that it is quite interesting. Voting turnouts for both 1988 and 1996 elections were quite low especially in 1996 where the turnout was below 50% however; in 2004, we see huge participation of people as compared to presidential elections in 1988 and presidential elections in 1996. Other than that, we see the inconsistency in the voting styles and the voter turnout for the American presidential elections.

Differences in voting turnouts for 1988, 1996 and 2004 elections:

The purpose of people voting for the presidential elections of 1988, 1996 and 2004 was quite different. In 1988, the background behind the majority of the people votes was to promote and continue the economic growth and prosperity that United States of America was going through especially the promise made by George Bush on no imposition of taxes.

In 1996 elections, also everything was going smoothly for the Americans until the attack at U.S. Military Complex in Khobar Towers Saudi Arabia where 19 Americans were killed. Before that, there was also an attack on the World Trade Centre. Bill Clinton treated both these events as a failure of law enforcement agencies, which ultimately effected the voters' decision.

In 2004 situation changed as United States of America was fighting war on two fronts both in Afghanistan and in Iraq, as a result George W. Bush was reelected in order to secure the United States of America from the external threats (Franklin, 2004)

Major Efforts to increase voter turnout:

In year, 1988 and 1996 no real efforts were made to increase the voting turnout for the American presidential elections, which can be clearly seen by comparing the turnout percentage for these two years, which were 50.15% and 49.08% respectively. However, in 2004 George W. Bush who had been earlier elected in the year 2000 as president wanted to get himself reelected for second term of presidency. For this different campaigns were initiated by addressing people to cast their votes if they wanted to make United States of America safe from the external threats that the country has been facing for a while now and also to continue its war on terror policy in Iraq and Afghanistan. At the same time, there were even campaigns against George W. Bush but at a small scale. These people criticized George W. Bush for his war on terror policy and demanded immediate withdrawal of the American troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. People were made to realize the importance of their votes as their country faith was associated with it. As a result, the election turnout was 55.27% with George W. Bush being reelected for the second term in two continuous presidential elections (Welch, Gruhl, Comer, & Rigdon, 2010).

Effects of lower voter turnout:

Effects of lower voter turnout can be clearly seen in the 1988 elections where Michael S. Dukakis was supposed to win but due to low voters turnout with majority of the people not casting votes were supporters of Michael S. Dukakis as a result a relatively weaker candidate George Bush won the elections. Low voting turnout has both direct and indirect effects on the country because the government that comes into being is responsible to represent and take of the people who have elected them as their representatives but when minority elects president for majority or the whole, country results are never fruitful.

Future Voting turnouts:

If we see the economic and social conditions of people living in America in 1988, 1996 and 2004 we see that these conditions were stable with employment up to 5% which are remarkable statistics due to which people thought their votes were really not that important as it will continue the same way as it was before but after electing George W. Bush for the second term in 2004 Americas economic and social conditions drastically changed. Unemployment started to rise at an alarming rate so did the prices of goods and services and for the very first time people realized that without casting their votes it was not necessary that things will always go well. So these people started to look for candidates who can solve their problems and take this country out of the mess in which it was as a result in 2008 presidential elections the turnout increased to 57.48% where 132,645,504 people casted their votes (Welch, Gruhl, Comer, & Rigdon, 2010).