Countdown to Extinction: The 2016 Presidential Election

[Todd]

Well, you are right about that, his hands must be bigger than we thought!!   

They're just big enough to open that wallet.

[Pat B]

Why isn't this getting more coverage?

Obviously, the Liberal Media doesn't want you to know about it.

The petition for open-carry at the RNC (50k and counting) is apparently satire. In this case it is really difficult to tell. It's a moot point since the Secret Service is in charge of security, but maybe it's not to late to get Ammon Bundy to replace them.

[knight66]

I became suspicious of democracy very early on. I would have been about 12 when the famous character of a popular soap, Ena Sharples of Coronation St, was writted out of the series with the death of the character. Granada, the TV station, was overwhelmed with flowers and wreaths that viewers had sent in sorrow. I thought then that I was going to be the victim of stupid people at the ballot box. Like was said above, although I would rather prefer if these dorks did not breed, I would not ultimately vote for it.

It is some kind of comfort that there are intensely stupid people in all corners of political opinion. Though they do seem to be rather more evenly spread in the UK than in the US.

Mike 

[Gurn Blanston]

Oh, it's Dick from the Internet... 

I love that guy!

[drogulus]

     

[Florestan]

Yes, it would be nice if the really important stuff was decided by vote and not by money. The US ought to try it.

For better or worse, the two major US parties select their presidential candidate by having all their registered members or sympathizers vote on the issue.

Does the Norwegian party you sympathize with, and vote for,  ever ask your opinion about who should be their candidate for the office of prime-minister?

I thought so.

Well, Norway ought to try it.

[knight66]

Well, yes, of course, that system is going so well in the US.

Mike

[André]

For better or worse, the two major US parties select their presidential candidate by having all their registered members or sympathizers vote on the issue.

Does the Norwegian party you sympathize with, and vote for,  ever ask your opinion about who should be their candidate for the office of prime-minister?

I thought so.

Well, Norway ought to try it.

In Canada, delegates of each riding are elected according to their preference in terms of the candidate they want the delegate to vote for. Then there's a national convention.  The whole process takes a few weeks.  It may be different but the aim and result are the same as in the US, without the hoopla, drama and vulgarity.

How is it in Romania  ?

[Florestan]

How is it in Romania  ?

Why, the local and national top echelon of each party selects their candidates. The rank and file has no saying whatsoever. No primaries, no national convention, nothing. Needless to say, only people who are ingratiated with the local or national party leaders have chances of being nominated. It is not unusual, for instance, to have as candidate for the office of a city mayor a person who doesn´t even reside in that city and knows next to nothing about the needs and problems of the locals. Sweet, ain´t it'?

[knight66]

You are right, it is a flat out abuse. Here the Labour Party members elected their leader. So the now customary disenchantment meant we got someone who bucks the trend, an outsider in a sense. However, I doubt any party wearing his complexion could win over the number of voters needed to form a government, especially as Scotland, previously a Labour Heartland, has pretty much extinguished Labour representation.

The Tory Party elect their leader rather more as you describe. Its government is not doing at all well, the EU issue may even split it. So the future is pretty uncertain. We might end up with Boris as PM, a sort of Trump-Lite. EEK!

Despite the shortcomings you point out; I don't want the wider election of party leader and usually therefore Prime Minister. I don't like the way that the likes of Trump can hijack the process by appealing to the disaffected, who seem only to listen out for slogans that have little substance.

Neither system seems satisfactory, each can be corrupted in their different ways. But when the legislators have their heads on facing forward, I think there is more chance of a sensible outcome.

Mike

[Florestan]

slogans that have little substance.

That´s a fairly accurate description of all Romanian major parties´ electoral tactic.

[The new erato]

For better or worse, the two major US parties select their presidential candidate by having all their registered members or sympathizers vote on the issue.

Does the Norwegian party you sympathize with, and vote for,  ever ask your opinion about who should be their candidate for the office of prime-minister?

No, because we've got a parliamentary system. The prime minister is selected by the king after a recommendation from the elected parliament. I seem to remember you have much faith in monarchs.

[Florestan]

No, because we've got a parliamentary system. The prime minister is selected by the king after a recommendation from the elected parliament. I seem to remember you have much faith in monarchs.

Can your king reject the person recommended by the parliament and ask for his/her replacement? If his role is to merely give formal assent to whomever is recommended (under these circumstances, imposed is actually more apt a term) to him then having faith in his discernment and judgement is out of question because he is simply not allowed to exercise them.

Anyway, your faith in the wisdom and benevolence of your political elites seems to be absolute.

[Karl Henning]

Why, the local and national top echelon of each party selects their candidates. The rank and file has no saying whatsoever. No primaries, no national convention, nothing. Needless to say, only people who are ingratiated with the local or national party leaders have chances of being nominated. It is not unusual, for instance, to have as candidate for the office of a city mayor a person who doesn´t even reside in that city and knows next to nothing about the needs and problems of the locals. Sweet, ain´t it'?

I think it worth pointing out that this is the sort of thing, against the perception of which El Tupé (and, rather more rationally, Senator Sanders) is running.

[Karl Henning]

That´s a fairly accurate description of all Romanian major parties´ electoral tactic.

Make America Great Again!

[Florestan]

I think it worth pointing out that this is the sort of thing, against the perception of which El Tupé (and, rather more rationally, Senator Sanders) is running.

Well, at least the primaries system allows for open revolt against political cronyism and for non-establishment candidates to emerge within the major parties. This is downright impossible in Romania and I suspect that not only here.

[The new erato]

Anyway, your faith in the wisdom and benevolence of your political elites seems to be absolute.

No, I just have another historical experience from you. You would do well to remember that extrapolating from Roumania may not be the best background to judge other systems. I don't believe that a system with direct voting would result in "less chaos", and I do believe that managing a country makes it necessary to make some compromises and long term judgments that not always is best left to "micromanaging" by he electorate, and I also have the experience that polticians that doessn't manage to do this while also taking into consideration popular feelings in the long run are voted out.

[Karl Henning]

Well, at least the primaries system allows for open revolt against political cronyism.

Fair enough.

[Florestan]

No, I just have another historical experience from you.

Fair enough.

You would do well to remember that extrapolating from Roumania may not be the best background to judge other systems.

Maybe Norway is exempt from that but in EU at least the discontentment with, and animosity towards, the establishment political elites from right to left is quite widespread and fully justified. And when traditional parties obstinately refuse to acknowledge the problems and tackle them, there is no wonder that extremism is on the rise.

polticians that doessn't manage to do this while also taking into consideration popular feelings in the long run are voted out.

In the long run yes, but how about all the damage they do to economy and society while they are still voted in? If the long run is something like 8 years, then some of that damage might even be beyond repair.

[The new erato]

Maybe Norway is exempt from that but in EU at least the discontentment with, and animosity towards, the establishment political elites from right to left is quite widespread and fully justified.

Well I don't see much government toppling......and I surely believe that people aren't manipulated into not voting for those politicians you seem to agree with. The political flora in most EU countries also makes it much easier to vote for alternatives than in the US where you in effect have only 2 parties and massive pressures (as it seem) to preselect candidates, in that regard I understand both the support for Trump and Sanders. As for whether that is fully justified, that is a value judgement.

As for historical experiences doesn't it strike you as somewhat interesting that votes in Poland seem to follow the older prewar east/west borders with the west markedly more liberal, and the former east more nationalistic/religious etc (left map in picture below):



I'll give you another example to reflect on; Norway is a member of Schengen. Popular opinion in Norway is that Roumania never should have been let inside Schengen as we have lots - and I mean really lots - of criminal activity related to Roumania (and also Latvia etc)....people whos movements we are not able to control or limit since they are inside Schengen.  Yet I am still able to see that in a larger picture (eg restraining Russian influence) letting these countries inside Schengen may have been necessary. Right or wrong?  Popular opinion can be remarkably shortsigted and onedimensional.