0
The best way I know to explain this is to describe how the process has changed over the years. A long time ago there were no primaries or conventions. Party leaders met in "smoke filled rooms" and chose who the candidates would be. Obviously, this wasn't very fair to the voters. Only a few people controlled the nomination process. No one knew what secret deals were being made.
Later, parties started conventions and brought a few hundred delegates together to choose a candidate. This widened the process, and eliminated some of the secrecy, but still pretty much limited it to a handful of white males.
Reforms in the 1960s created the primary system as we know it. Now any registered voter can have a say in who the candidates are. Conventions are still held to write a party platform and kick off the campaign. Delegates that attend the convention still officially vote for and decide the nomination. They are supposed to vote for the candidate that the state's voters chose, and since the delegates are loyal members of the party, they almost always cast their vote the way they are supposed to. But if no candidate gathered enough delegates, the convention has to decide. Also, if for some reason no candidate was decided on the first ballot (voting round) then the delegates may start changing their votes on subsequent ballots.
So, the convention is more of a formality now, but it is possible that the nomination could be decided at the convention. Candidates in third place may also have delegates at the convention, and if there are enough of them, the candidate might encourage his or her delegates to vote for the second place candidate. The combination of votes might put the second place candidate over the top.
Have I confused you more?
Still curious? Ask our experts.
Chat with our AI personalities
Judy
Rene
Maxine
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
How does the appointment and confirmation process restrict presidential power?
The appointment and confirmation process restricts presidential power. This is because these appointments aren't scheduled by the president. These appointments are scheduled by a different part of the government system, and this is the answer to your question.
What is the senat's role in the appointment process?
The majority of senators present and vote for confirmation.
What do the articles of the Constitution explicitly outline?
The process by which congressional representatives are allocated to states
What are two methods interest groups use to influence the appointment of US Supreme Court nominees?
AnswerThe different interest groups of our country may influence the appointment process in many ways. One is donations. If any interest group, say an environmental one donates a lot of money to the appointment process then of course the nominee that is pro environment will take the seat. Another way is smear campaigns. Simply smear campaigns is the process where interest groups damage the reputation of not only supreme court nominees but also any politician. This does not so much, but what it does is makes the opinion of the public change and that is what causes the nominee's reputation to be damaged.Interest groups only have influence over Supreme Court nominations to the extent that they control the President or potentially affect his reelection, if applicable. The expectations of constituents and broad demographic groups are more likely to factor into the decision-making process than campaign contributions (you can't donate directly to the appointment process, as suggested above), and it may be necessary to compromise with the majority power in the Senate, if that party differs from the President's."Smear campaigns" are more relevant to the electoral process, because such tactics are intentionally targeted at people who either can't, or won't, research the issues for themselves. Public criticism of a Supreme Court nominee, who is removed from the popular election process, has more impact on people's perceptions of the President and the president's political party than on the nomination process.
Which branch of government can reject the appointment of judges?
The Legislative Branch, but specifically the Senate, which is only one chamber of Congress. The House of Representatives does not play a role in the appointment process.This, of course, applies to the US. Other countries may have different requirements.
