It's not that we have primaries - which are useful. Â But that you have to be a member of a political party to vote in them and that eliminates a lot of people from the process.
As for economy... that's complex- the average buyer can't buy if they can't find a job. Â Congress just passed regulations that will make it easier for companies to lay off people and work the remaining workers 50-60 hours a week because overtime has been eliminated. Â We'll see what effect if any this has. But it is hard to find decent jobs here...I was laid off a few months ago and have a temporary job with no benefits and there are no prosects on the horizon.
QUOTE |
As for economy... that's complex- the average buyer can't buy if they can't find a job. Â Congress just passed regulations that will make it easier for companies to lay off people and work the remaining workers 50-60 hours a week because overtime has been eliminated. |
Well I don't know if you are religious, but that is why this place (earth) is only going to get more and more messed up and will take Him (God) to bring a change. No earthly 'President' even if it were with terminator like looks and muscles can really bring about the kind of change that only He (God) can. Well what am I trying to say? Basically, should we expect much from those that are elected? I think the question nowadays is what was said earlier... who will protect my family the most. I guess some think Bush will do that, others are not sure if protection is worth losing a job. Who knows?
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 3231 100%
I agree Jb. I also don't think that Bush will do that. He has caused much uprising against the U.S. already. I worry that he may be elected again. Even if I do vote for the 'other fella'. I really hope that Bush doesn't get elected, I fear it can and probably will only get worse.
With regards to what Sofia said ..... it's so true about the primaries. You are not able to vote for the candidate of your choice if you're not in the party.
And also, in the case of Bush, is it democratic at all that no other Republican can challenge him in the primary? Just because he is the President and he has announce his intention to seek re-election doesn't mean the rest of the Republicans got to stand aside, does it? I'm not clear on this but is that the law or is it just the practice to give way to the President?
It's not the law - but the reality is you're not going to win the nomination if you don't have the backing of the party. That and who's going to contribute to your campaign if you don't have the party blessings. McCain was very popular with the people so the party went to work canvassing for Bush because he represented their interests.
What's really bad about the whole voting thing, is the election is all determined by electorial votes for each state. That's why alot of presidental candidates mainly campaign in the larger states. If I remember correctly, electorial votes are figured up by how many Senate and Representative seats for each state. Like if a state that doesn't have that many Senators or Representatives, but the majority of the people voted for one particular person, it doesn't really matter. The elections mainly count the electorial votes, not the majority vote. I think that they should change that too. The president should be elected by the majority vote, not the electorial vote.
I read somewhere the electoral votes were to provide equal representation to smaller states. If issues were split by rural and urban interests - urban interests would always prevail in a popular vote. I don't know that is true but that is at least part of the theory.