The racial group that tends to vote the most often includes African American groups and Caucasian groups. Women tend to vote as much as men. Asian people and Hispanic people tend to vote the least.
Counting votes for a sample of how an election is going.
yes and no are normally adverbs but can also be used as nouns:yes (pl yesses, yeses, or yes's): a vote or answer of yes; a person who votes or answers yesno (pl noes or nos): a vote or answer of no; a denial; a refusal; a person who votes or answers no
Noting that a candidate needed plurality of votes to win the election, the announcer prepared to read the results.
The spelling to the word unanimous is unanimous. :D
When you "records the minutes" you are making formal notes of what was discussed in a meeting, what questions were voted upon, and what the results of the votes were.
Generally speaking, the Democratic Party can count on receiving the most votes from two groups. Usually from union members and also among minority groups. This has been true for many years. Both of these groups believe that Democrats are more favorable to them then Republicans.
No.
Both Parties would like to get more votes from these groups, but the Democrats get most of their votes at present because of their more social legislation for borht groups and their liberal immigration policies for Latinos.
No. "Racial Equality" is a philosophical ideal, one which promotes the concept that all human beings, regards of genetic background, should be considered equal in the eyes of the law (and other humans).These days, "racial equality" as a philosophy is subscribed to (i.e. believed) by the vast majority of Americans. That said, there is significant debate about the practical matters of how racial equality is to be handled, and the government's role in helping bring about the reality of the ideal. As such, particular positions on the implementation of racial equality by a politician are often (perhaps usually) an attempt to garner votes.
a trustee votes with his beliefs a delegate votes for who he represents a partisan votes with his party and a politico mixes all 3 together like a bigass soup pot.
STEVEN I. WILKINSON has written: 'VOTES AND VIOLENCE: ELECTORAL COMPETITION AND ETHNIC RIOTS IN INDIA'
The US Senate would choose the vice president from among the top three if no candidate gets a majority of the electoral votes.
Andrew Jackson in 1824 Nobody had the required minimum number of votes. When that happens, the House of Representatives elects the president from among the three with the most votes. They chose John Quincy Adams, who had the second-most electoral votes.
The House of Representatives votes for the President from among the top three electoral candidates, with each state delegation casting one vote.
Maine and Nebraska
William Crawford finished last among the four contending candidates. I would guess that others received write-in votes, but I am only guessing there.
In 1800, much as today, if no one received a majority of the electoral votes. the House would elect a president from among the top five (now three) candidates with each state getting one vote. The person remaining with the most electoral votes would be vice-president unless two or more had the same number of votes. In this case, the Senate would choose the vice-president from among these top candidates.