From the 1964 Ralph G. Martin book, Ballots and Bandwagons, a compilation of events from five political conventions in the early half of the twentieth century:
“Political Axiom Number One says that the brighter the presidential prospect of victory, the greater the crop of available candidates.”
It is a pretty simple rule, but do you agree with such an axiom?
The first thing I did after reading this was-look up the definition of axiom. An axiom is a set and stone law or principle. Perhaps with a greater victory of a parties candidate, there was more money being earned in the campaign process which allows other candidates in local and state elections to run. That makes sense to me.
This was kind of difficult to understand, but after reading it multiple times I agree with this rule. I think that the sentence, when it refers to the brighter the presidential prospect of victory means that greater chance of winning an election you will have a bigger group of candidates who will try and run for president in hopes of winning the election.
This was by far the most interesting topic I’ve seen so far on Poliscinews, and I would have to say that I do agree with this axiom. I believe if one presidential candidate can actually help forgo a stable and successful future, then that would help promote more potential future candidates to run for election.
I agree with this axiom, I believe that if in upcoming election theres a candidate who has a greater chance to win the outcomes does result in more candidates who will run. This axiom is one that goes on till this day. I believe that elections wouldn’t be as big as they are if it wasn’t for the fact of having colorful politicians that attract voters.
I don’t agree. Anyone with money can run of any type of office. The tricky part of running is getting people on your side. If you portray a good image and get people to believe in what you’re selling then you have a solid chance at wining