The American democracy is one of the most peaceful kinds of government in the world although it is a long way from utopia. The democracy in which we live has many strengths and weaknesses. Neither strengths or weaknesses out weigh one another, but it is necessary to have both due to the varying definitions. A democracy is a government that is run by the people.
The politicians that we elect to run our government are human and they are susceptible to mistakes based on their own strengths and weaknesses. The strengths and weaknesses they possess are reflected into our government but at least "we the people" elect them and they are not chosen for us. We live in a representative democracy that means "we the people" are given the right to elect those who represent our beliefs and values. The political campaigns of the politicians allows us the freedom of who to elect by selling us their views on how they feel our government should function. Many of the campaigns seem to dispute the candidate running against the other (s) but it normally ties into what they believe is wrong.
Sometimes a candidate's campaign will run according to one of the candidates mistakes that they have made in office or in life. The candidate may then promise they would never make a mistake of that sort. The campaigns now days tend to be more on the negative side but negativity sells in this country. While positive campaigns reflect more on the positive goals of the campaigned it would cost more to promote than negative campaigns. The negativity tends to stick in our minds more than the positive. It is kind of like a relationship, you tend to remember the bad more than the good.
The same applies to campaigning. When some of us go to the ballot box we remember certain commercials either on the television or radio. And nine times out of ten, we remember the negative commercials over the positive. The campaigns are suppose to educate us and negative campaigns is not a good way to do that. The positive campaigns are the ones that should educate us. Positive campaigns promote "the will of the people." The "will of the people" want trust, security, someone they can relate to.
But with positive campaigns there is a drawback, it costs more money. Now you have those people who want to reform campaign finance. They feel we already spend too much money on campaigning. If you have the money supporting you, then you should be allowed to spend the money in whatever way it best suits your campaigning. More money does not mean a victory, just ask Ross Perot. More money could mean more positive campaigns and better education about the politicians for "we the people." Some people feel we should let the newspapers and media inform us about candidates, but the media is the worst critic of all.
Journalists are paid big bucks to see who can find the dirtiest secret one person has done. So, what positive influences could the media possibly provide to us? Our media in this country is out of control and they inform us of issues we do not need to know about. While there are some Americans who want to hear these types of issues, many of us could not care less. In order to make positive campaigns more affective we need to get back to the basics.
Politicians should serve their term limit and during their time they should do for the constituents and not spend so much time and money worrying about their next campaign. "We the people" elect those who represent certain issues and sometimes when they are sworn in to do their duty, they change their view on the issues. When politicians do this, it makes those who voted for him or her disappointed and cause them to lose faith in our democracy. The political system has succeeded but I believe it has little to do with religion.
The founding fathers may have had God in mind but in today's society when dealing with our democracy, religion has nothing to do with it. There are way too many diversities of religion in this country and "we the people" do not agree upon them. In conclusion the American political system has about as many strengths and as many weaknesses, but it evens out in the long run. If our democracy consisted of all strengths it would not be fair and equal to all citizens. We are all different and have different beliefs and values so a utopian democracy is not possible. We live in a democracy that has succeeded mainly because it has changed with society.
"We the people" have the right to run the government and if we are not satisfied with the government, we have the power to change it, because we are a democracy.