Presidential Candidates

4 Responses to Presidential Candidates

1. slothman (UID# 672) 0  0

   February 3, 2008 at 1:25 am

   And if you don’t like the choices you’re given by the Democrat-Republican cartel, change the system so third parties have a chance.

   Reply
2. schulzbrianr (UID# 1277) 0  0

   February 3, 2008 at 10:50 am

   Or you could just run under whatever party you want, no matter what your agenda is, like McCain.

   Reply
3. caio (UID# 104) 0  0

   February 3, 2008 at 2:29 pm

   I have to say, fairvote.org is the stupidest thing I’ve ever seen. America (and Canada and the UK) is in desperate need for proportional representation for its legistlatures: The power of the president is massively exagerated. Have you noticed that Bush hasn’t been getting into much shit since the dems took over in congress? There’s a reason. A multiparty system isn’t feasable for a one-man position, really. Multi-party shines in the legislature. Do you realize that in virtually every multi-party republic (republic in the traditional meaning), the Head-of-State is still two-party? But it doesn’t fucking matter what the pres is because the legislature does and should have so much more power?
   .
   The one major power the pres *does* have is running the civil service. Howabout making the entire cabinet elected, ensuring accountability is spread around instead of just having one ruler of the entire civil service?
   .
   What fairvote is doing should be last on the list of electoral reform. The fact that Americans allow themselves so much time to dwell on the first trivialities thrown infront of them between Big Macs is probably the reason so many of them are unaware of what positive changes are possible. Your idleness and lemming-like nature will always leave your system fucked.

   Reply
4. reboot (UID# 436) 0  0

   

   February 3, 2008 at 2:45 pm

   “How about making the entire cabinet elected, ensuring accountability is spread around instead of just having one ruler of the entire civil service?”
   The is a great idea and not the first time I’ve heard it proposed. Another advantage is that when electing a President, we have to balance a number of issues (eg I agree with democrats on civil rights but agree with republicans on gun control), but if only voting for, say, a Secretary of Defense, then I don’t have to consider his view on welfare, education, etc. because that isn’t his job. Instead of having a jack-of-all-trades CIC we can really vote for someone who is master of their profession.

   Reply