Pluralist and Class domination with 2012 American presidential election - Assignment Example

Module Pluralist and Domination in the US Presidential Election From the data provided, it is very obvious that the economic elites got the presidents they wanted in all the elections held between 2000 and 2012. By virtue of his income between 2008 and 2011, it is safe to conclude that Obama is a member of the economic elites. His income in the four years leading up to the 2012 elections shows that he belongs to the upper class of the American society because his income before the elections. The incomes of the other three candidates also falls in the upper class range, especially Mitt Romney’s.

The corporate class is typically composed of upper class people with a little sprinkling of middle class Americans. Looking at the distribution of the contributions to the major candidates in 2012, it is safe to conclude that the upper class contributed the most funds to the major candidates. Putting the two scenarios together leads to interesting inferences. The first is that President Obama, an upper class American, was mainly sponsored by upper class Americans in his reelection. Therefore, economic elites had the biggest influence on his reelection bid.

The second inference is that the highest economic class also contributed the most to the presidential bids of the other main candidates, who also belong to the highest economic class. Overall, the data shows that the corporate class played the biggest role in the 2012 American elections and prior ones, dwarfing the contributions of the working class. While the working class’ only major contribution is voting, the corporate class vote and also fund elections.For the pluralists, this data disproves of their notion that power lies with the majority, not with a small band of individuals who have the biggest say because of their economic status.

Pluralist often argue that elected American officials, together with interest groups such as consumers and labor organizations, have enough counterpoising power to prove that there is a more transparent, equitable and democratic distribution of power (McKay 16). According to them, power resides with the public, not elitist people and rich corporations at the apex. However, the data provided shows that US economic elites sponsor their fellow economic elites to power. We cannot, therefore, argue that the American government is pluralistic.

It is only pluralistic in word but not in deed. The people who contribute the most to presidential elections often hold the most power (McKay 29).For the class domination theory, the data shows that power in the American government is dominated by the economic elite, who contribute more to presidential elections. The data completely agrees with the class domination theory. The data shows that in the United States, elites have more power than in most democratic nations. The data also shows that America elites, who contribute more to presidential elections and who own the richest corporations, also control the systems for creating and holding wealth in the country.

Research shows that they have been doing this for over 150 years now (McKay 33). The data also means that the elite, with the support of their high-level workers in profit and nonprofit organizations, dominate the federal government. This view has also been backed by findings of other studies (McKay 36). Work CitedMcKay, David. American Politics and Society. 8th ed. Chichester, West Sussex, U.K.: John Wiley & Sons, 2013. Print.