On Wednesday 23 August 2006 18:05, Ron Johnson wrote: > Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Wednesday 23 August 2006 17:19, Steve Lamb wrote: > >> Marc Shapiro wrote: > > [snip] > > > I'm of the world opinion, which is more or less why I want out. > > You can agree with Jacques Chirac, I'll have the correct opinion. I don't agree with Jacques Chirac, I disagree with the Republican Party, and parliamentary selection of prime minister is favorable to the electoral college crap-shoot, which has resulted in hugely unfavorable results in my lifetime with Clinton's second term (lost the popular, won the EC) and both terms of George Bush (lost the popular, lost the EC, won the supreme court). While I like Clinton, it was obvious before Bush from the popular election, and the successful impeachment and attempted conviction of Clinton for doing a White House intern (never mind some of his best work was done while boning said intern) that the Electoral College method for electing a sovereign is inherently flawed and made me start questioning it's continued existence¹ versus instant run-off and other, actually democratic and representative, forms of elections for President. That isn't to say ECs are entirely useless, they can be used in a way that is at least a somewhat republican (as in democracy by committee like a republic, not as in supporting empirical totalitarianism as is the current American definition) ideal. Now France has the right idea of an electoral college: It's only used to elect the less influential senate, not the one person with sole veto and executive privilege. Mistakes by the EC are greatly blunted because the power of legislature comes from greater numbers, not a sole individual. EC doesn't really work to choose anything smaller than a large committee, and fails entirely when selecting a single person. Jacques Chirac isn't a saint, but at least his rise to power was at least representative and not based on a technicality and activist judicial fiat. ¹ For those not of US origin, the US has had an electoral college to decide it's soverign since it's inception, the popular vote for president is legally nonbinding in nearly all states: the electoral college can and does vote for whoever it wants. Out of a quarter billion people, only 538 appointed, not elected, people out of the entire country are allowed to have a binding vote for US president. So if you don't like the current president, you only have 538 people to blame, not the rest of us who had no non-violent method to have any say, pro or con, in the matter. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): baloo@ursine.ca
Attachment:
pgpqsjI6MzbE7.pgp
Description: PGP signature