I'm Lindsay Chervinsky, executive director
of the George Washington Presidential Library.
I'm here to answer your questions today from the internet.
lonelady75 asks, Why does the American
election campaign process take so long?
but imagine Congress passed a bill saying
this was the moment when candidates
were supposed to declare their election
If a candidate declared before then
they would likely bring a lawsuit challenging
the bill's restrictions on their freedom of speech.
One of our most important amendments is our First Amendment,
which guarantees a certain amount of political speech,
And various different levels of American courts,
have been very protective of political speech.
So it would be very difficult to put limitations
on the political process in this way
because they would likely be struck down by the court.
Both parties have reason to hate the Electoral College,
The Electoral College exists because it is in
the Constitution and it is incredibly difficult to change.
The interesting thing about the Electoral College
at the Constitutional Convention opposed direct election
of the president because they worried
that it would lead to a demagogue or mob rule.
So they wanted to have some sort of check
between American voters and the presidency,
but they didn't necessarily want to empower
the state legislatures to make that choice.
towards the very end of the Constitutional Convention,
they came up with the concept of the electoral college
and written into the draft Constitution,
which was then ratified by the states.
In order to amend the Constitution,
the bill would have to pass Congress
by a two-thirds vote in both houses,
and then would have to be approved by 3/4 of the states.
That's highly unlikely to happen at this point.
whd13b says, Gerrymandering needs to be outlawed.
If you can't win based on your policies
and have to gerrymander to win an election,
you're clearly not the winning party.
And in fact, all Congress would need to do
either racial or political gerrymandering.
Gerrymandering originally emerged in 1812 in Massachusetts
in order to give the Democratic Republicans the advantage.
And Congress hasn't passed that law
because it would often diminish their power.
No one really wants to vote themselves out of office,
and so neither party is incentivized
StopHavingAnOpinion asks, Why do young people
rarely turn up in numbers at elections?
Young people don't vote in the same numbers
as older generations for a couple of reasons.
They tend to be more transient, moving regularly,
often going to college or other places for work.
And they often haven't updated their voter registration
or maybe they're still getting a ballot at home
with their parents but don't have access to it.
Young people often have jobs that are less flexible.
Maybe they are wage workers or they're working hourly
and they aren't able to take that time off for the election.
And lastly, young people often don't have
the same sort of accumulated wealth.
So a lot of the decisions that are being made
on the local ballot, the state ballot,
seem like they will have less impact
on their financial security or their financial future.
Those that have money tend to be more invested
in the outcome and are much more likely
Can the president cancel or postpone an election?
Elections are entirely controlled by the states,
and any federal legislation is controlled by Congress.
probably the nation's most significant crisis,
we continued to hold regular elections
and even manage to get absentee ballots
AdRealistic1356 asks, Why are US elections held
on a Tuesday, November, rather than on a Sunday
which mandated that federal elections
are to be held on the first Tuesday
after the first Monday in November.
This was originally selected as the day,
because the United States was still largely
had to harvest their crops in the fall.
So by the time November rolled around,
most farmers were able to make their way to the polls,
which sometimes required traveling a great deal of distance.
Tuesdays were really selected for convenience.
and Wednesdays were usually market days.
So, selection of a Tuesday gave farmers time
to travel to and from their place of polling.
Cemsam asks, How is it ensured that those counting
the votes do not commit fraud themselves?
They are some of the safest in the world,
and that's because there are several levels
Each county generally has a counting process
where it compares voter rolls to the poll registers
that are actually showing up on that day.
There are then digital records that are compared
to the paper ballots and the paper polls that are taken.
Those are then often sent to a county commissioner board
to do an audit to ensure that they pass
and then they are sent to the federal level.
So all of those levels of protections really ensure
and that there is very little fraud.
hiphoptomato asks, Why can't we make online voting work?
West Virginia piloted a program in 2018
where voters cast their vote on a blockchain system.
don't include online voting as an option
is because it would require each state legislature
to pass a bill extending a virtual ballot to the voters.
However, some experts think that paper balloting
because then you have an option to go back
So a lot of state officials still oppose
and it's unlikely to become widespread in the near future.
Why did the founding fathers design a system
that guaranteed the two-party doom they feared?
So the system that the founding fathers created
doesn't actually guarantee a two-party system.
It does make it likely that political factions would emerge,
which is what they were anticipating.
They thought that there would be a lot of little factions
that would come together to form a coalition
over one particular issue or one particular candidate,
but then would dissolve and reorganize in a couple of years.
The two-party system really emerged
The way that we count votes for the Electoral College
is often decided by a winner takes all system,
meaning whoever wins the state gets all of the delegates.
That makes it much harder for a third-party candidate
or an independent candidate to make its way
and cause real competition to one of the two parties.
fk430 asks, Why do we limit the presidency to two terms?
George Washington only served two terms as president,
it was really important for Americans
to learn how to conduct a peaceful transfer
Otherwise, all of his successors would be likely
to serve for the rest of their lives,
making the presidency basically an elected king.
Most of Washington's successors adhered
to that two-term president until Franklin D. Roosevelt,
Congress proposed in 1947 an amendment, the 22nd,
making this two-term precedent embedded in the Constitution.
In 1951, it was ratified by the necessary states
and now restricts all presidents to two terms.
A user from Presidents Subreddit asks,
Was Nixon's performance during the debates partly
Yes, but not necessarily because he said anything wrong
or was inaccurate with his information.
The 1960 election was a watershed moment
It was the first time that television
and it was the changing of the guard of a new generation.
John F. Kennedy really played to the cameras,
and it seemed like he understood the medium.
He was tanned, his outfit looked great on television,
On the other hand, Richard Nixon hadn't had
and he had a really heavy five o'clock shadow
He looked kind of old and sweating,
as though he was part of the older generation.
And this confirmed what a lot of people
Dwight D. Eisenhower had been in the office for eight years,
and although he was a very successful president,
many Americans were ready for a generational change.
Because John F. Kennedy looked so young and vibrant
on television that confirmed what a lot of people thought,
that he was the right person for this new moment.
GotPerl asks, What was the reasoning for picking 35
as the minimum age for President of the United States?
During the Constitutional Convention,
suggested that there should be an age limit
And he referred to his own experience
when he was 21 and he didn't have much knowledge or wisdom.
suggested that any date would be arbitrary,
and he referred to many great British prime ministers
and members of parliament in the past
who had done extraordinary things in their 20s.
Thelenzo asks, Did George W. Bush really steal an election
The 2000 presidential election was contested
there wasn't a final result because of the Florida votes.
There was a butterfly ballot effect,
which caused several of the ballots that were cast
for Al Gore to go to a third-party candidate.
A butterfly ballot required the voter
but the way that the punch out worked
often was confusing and led to mixed results.
Additionally, because the vote was so close,
a recount under Florida law was required.
However, the Bush campaign challenged that recount
and it ultimately went up to the Supreme Court,
Later analysis of the election suggests
that if a recount was conducted of just the one county,
President Bush likely would've been the winner,
whereas if a recount was conducted of the entire state,
Al Gore likely would've won Florida
and also the presidential election.
Mysterious_Mix_6879 asks, Which election was truly
Probably both of Ronald Reagan's elections.
In 1980, Ronald Reagan beat Jimmy Carter
And in 1984, he beat Walter Mondale 525 votes to 13.
In the 1970s, the United States was going through
a really difficult period with the loss of Vietnam,
Watergate, inflation, and then Jimmy Carter's presidency
due to the Iran hostage negotiations.
He encouraged people to be patriotic,
and he seemed like he would be a strong defender
People were really ready for a change,
and Reagan was a happy warrior and harnessed that change.
strongerthanbefore20 asks, Why do midterms usually end up
with the party of the current president losing?
Midterms halfway through a presidential election
tend to be a referendum on that current administration.
So, because we only elect a president every four years,
to express either approval or disapproval.
Americans tend to get frustrated with their presidents.
They tend to have a fairly short attention span
and they want things to change after a couple of years.
when only seven states really matter?
and we, of course, vote for federal officials.
Our votes on all of those elections impact everything
financial policy, Supreme Court candidates, and more.
Additionally, those seven states often change over time.
So, just because you are in a safe blue state
that they won't be a swing state later.
Lastly, just remember, if you don't vote,
sicbprice asks, Could an independent
or third-party candidate for US president
However, it would require a great deal of reform
State primaries largely prioritize Republicans
and Democrats, the two entrenched parties.
It's much more difficult to get on the ballot
if you're not a member of those two parties.
So we would need to pass a great deal of legislation
at the state level to change how primary systems work.
You would also then need to pass legislation
the Electoral College votes are counted.
For example, California has 54 Electoral College votes,
and whoever wins the state gets all of those votes,
whereas states like Nebraska and Maine
actually split up their Electoral College votes
depending on the congressional district.
that a third-party candidate could win,
or could at least win enough to throw the election
where the states would vote rather than individual voters.
Why doesn't the US do an Election Week
The United States actually used to do an election six weeks.
Each state got to decide when it held its election,
and those generally took place from late September
into the Electoral College or into Congress,
This understandably caused a great deal of chaos,
because the news would come trickling in
and maybe the results of an early state
and there was a lot of gamesmanship
to make the federal election one day,
the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November.
receives 270 Electoral College votes?
in order to win a presidential election.
then the election is thrown to the House of Representatives.
of course, in addition to territories
So, that would mean that a candidate
