I say yes, you say no, OR People are Strange

Wabbit

lassie ... I envy that you have more political parties to choose from.  I think that must make it mandatory that they cooperate with each other more instead of always playing 'gotcha'. 

Unfortunately money rules here and it is almost impossible for a new political party to get any traction.

crazy4carrots

Athena -- Correct me if I'm remembering my history incorrectly, but...wasn't the Electoral College originally instituted because it was supposedly a guard against the "uneducated rabble" choosing a President who the elite saw as unsuitable?

BarbaraA

Linda, I believe you are correct. I think it should be abolished and allow popular vote to prevail.

Saw this today and found it interesting.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/blogs/ralstons-flash/2011/mar/04/rory-reids-gubernatorial-campaign-circumvented-con/

lassie11

That's interesting about Reid's campaign financing. Attempting to circumvent the rules is one of the issues against the Conservatives here who currently are in power. I wish a minority government meant they would have to work together. The current batch are ruling as if they have a majority causing us to teeter permanently on the edge of another election.

BarbaraA

I would think a new election would solve the problem, Lassie. I have been reading about the impending no confidence vote with interest.

River_Rat

I would like to see a voting system that would provide for third and even fourth parties to gain strength and yet not lead to someone being elected without a majority of votes.  Such as, when you vote you would pick your first choice, and then indicate a second choice.  When the "first" choice of the voters was added up if there wasn't a majority then the second choice would kick in.  For example, if I wanted a Green Party candidate but knew he really didn't stand much of a chance I could vote for him, knowing that if the Republican candidate didn't get a majority then my second choice vote for the Democratic candidate would be counted.

I used to split my ticket and in fact preferred a divided government.  However, as both the Republican and Democratic parties have pushed to the right I find that usually the Democrats are to my right and the Republicans are so far to the right of me that I haven't been able to vote split ticket in about the last decade - other than for municipal elections.

One of my sons-in-law is a Republican who says he wants to fix the party from within, meaning that he wants to pull it back to the center, especially on social issues.  But he had never voted for a Republican for president, had voted for the Dems.  He had been excited over the prospect of voting for McCain but after the Palin selection he just couldn't do it.  But he was pleased that he voted for the Republican for governor this time and he got in.  He also thought that Snyder was more moderate than he is now seeming so we'll see if either of us is happy for very long. 

Bren-2007

I wonder if the 2010 elections would have turned out differently had McCain picked a different running mate.  I was considering McCain until the second time I heard Palin speak.  After that I voted along party lines. 

Bren

rosemary-b

Bren

I also thought Palin was a brilliant move for McCain, until I heard her speak. I was for Hilary and ended up voting for Obama. I think Hilary has done a credible job as Secratary of State and it is good to see her on her own and not uhder Bill's shadow.

1Athena1

Yes, Lindasa, that's correct. Completely outdated thinking.

covertanjou

I thought Palin was great at the GOP convention. Unfortunately, she then had to speak without a prepared speech, and then she gave some interviews and....well we know how those went.  It was also scary to hear her stump speeches with her accusations of "palling with terrorists" and other vitriolic speeches.  I think if McCain had chosen another running mate, he could have perhaps won the presidency.

Politico has a great article on Palin: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51218.html

Bren-2007

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51218.html

Mary .. reposting your link. 

River_Rat

I agree that the election would have likely gone the other way but for the Palin pick.  There was a time when I would have voted for McCain, but that time had already passed.  I would have voted for him if he had won the primary against Bush but that loss seemed to really change him from someone who I really did consider a "Maverick" into just another politician and if I was going to vote for just another politician it had to be someone closer to my positions.  Now I can't decide if I was wrong, if he never was a "Maverick", only ever was just a politician.

1Athena1

McCain's strategists arguably did more to torpedo his election than anyone else did. Palin didn't help, but I do not think she lost him the election. IN fact, I believe that McCain's people did everything they could to make her the scapegoat. I dislike Palin intensely, but she was also mistreated. The likes of Steve Schmidt and McCain himself did that campaign in. The mismanagement and lack of focus were there from the start. Remember how his campaign almost went bankrupt during the primaries?

The 2008 financial crisis evidenced the fact that McCain is clueless about the economy (and most other domestic policy) and his downward spiral in the polls really came from there. He was bound to get tripped up on policy sooner or later. McCain couldn't even remember his own health-care plan properly and Douglas Holz-Eakin (economic advisor) kept having to triage his comments. His "shoot first, ask questions later" attitude may have served him well at wartime but not in politics. And his choice of Palin, as the one executive decision, showed what a disaster he would have been. Obama's choice of a long time critic, Biden, showed exactly the opposite.

I read an interesting New York Times magazine piece early on in the election season which argued that McCain had essentially never left Vietnam in attitude. Metaphorically, he was still fighting the fight long after it was over and he could not conceive of life in any other terms. His imprisonment and isolation during years of torture may have been to blame. I admire his courage and service and think he is a good man, but he does not have the wisdom or the cool head to react (and he took his defeat like a baby, IMO). His response to the meltdown in Wall Street was an embarrassment. I almost felt sorry for him. His first proposal - to create a fact finding commission, also reminded me of Hillary, whose response to everything was "let's create a commission." Obama was the only one bold and clear minded enough to say let's do "xyz." IMO, of course.

I am one who thinks that innate qualities may be what most counts in a president. Experience matters too, but if I could only have one or the other, I would take the person's raw ability and talent. This is because in the US our government bureaucracy and our institutions of civil society are sufficiently mature and established to run the country in some senses. I wonder if in a parliamentary system I might favor a different type of leader. I also think that pragmatism has to be combined with idealism. You need a certain naivete of conviction in order to take on this difficult job. I wouldn't want a jaded person. Great statesmen throughout history have had traits in common, such as their idealism and spirit. In addition: their sense of timing and purpose and their ability to read the pulse of the times. Obama, IMO, has all of this. Competent managers have rarely moved the world. In a president, I want something extra. In a prime minister....if it's a chancellor in Germany, I am happy enough with Merkel - lol!

What a disjointed post. Started on one foot, ended on another...Too much worry, too little rest. :-)

3monstmama

Coming late to discussion re the puppy mills in Missouri---There are people who think of animals as lesser.  They just do and they won't change.  Me, I put my money where my mouth is--all my cats have been strays or abandoned and all have been spayed or neutered including the two delightful adults who joined our household yesterday.

What gets me about this is that this isn't a case of somebody shoving a bill through--this was the PEOPLE voting.  The shoving-a-bill-through part is now, when what The People voted on is being overturned.

I don't always think The People are right.  The People thought segregation was just fine for years and years.  But what befuddles me is how people who say that they want the will of the People to be in charge are so quick to ignore the will of The People when campaign contributions conflict with the will of The People. 

crazy4carrots

Edited to say I tried to post a link, but it didn't work (so what's new??!!)

konakat

3monstmama -- you make a very good point that the people aren't always necessarily right. 

If the people voted to keep puppy mills going I would have been just as pissed off!

I'm happy that in Ottawa you can't get a puppy at a pet store and all the cats are humane society spayed/neutered cats. 

Bren-2007

My pets have all been rescues.  Well, except for the first two standard weiner dogs, we bought them from a family with the parents on site.  The last kitty I rescued I found on the side of the road.

I am deadset against puppy mills and wish they could all be abolished!

Bren

Bren-2007

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/14/rick-snyder-corporate-taxes/

I'm posting this link for Linda. 

Following suit, Gov. Rick Snyder (R-MI) has proposed ending his state's Earned Income Tax Credit, cutting a $600 per child tax credit, and reducing credits for seniors, while also cutting funding for school districts by eight to ten percent. At the same time, as the Michigan League for Human Services found, the state's business taxes would be reduced by nearly $2 billion, or 86 percent, under Snyder's plan.

Unbelievable!! 

1Athena1

How repulsive.

crazy4carrots

Thanks Bren!  I'm getting really disgusted by the efforts of newly elected Governors to systematically destroy the middle class in the U.S.  It seems to be a "Steal from the poor, give to the rich" methodology.  As a Canadian, I fear that our own Conservative government may start to lean the same way.

Bren-2007

I just don't get it .. why penalize the poor and elderly?  I think there are going to be a lot of regrets over some of the repub choices voted for in 2010!

Bren

bluedahlia

Because they are not useful in their eyes.

River_Rat

If you don't like that you should hear what they're doing to our schools and cities.  It's almost too hard for me to talk about.  

Bren-2007

Blue .. That's sad, but probably true.

konakat

Appalling, shocking, dispicable. 

River_Rat

Post election here in Michigan we have a Republican majority in our state house, state senate, governor, supreme court, secretary of state, attorney general.....you get the picture.

Well running all of that isn't enough for them.  They are now in the process of enacting legislation that for cities and school districts that are in financial trouble they will appoint a special financial manager that has the power to void contracts and fire at will....including those voted into office.  They've already got these contractors ready to go (of course companies that have been favorable to the Republicans).  They aren't satisfied with the state government they want to run as much of the local as possible too.  And get rid of those pesky union employees.

Sorry, I'm getting too hotted up - have to step away for a moment. 

crazy4carrots

So much for democracy in Michigan....

River_Rat

Yeah, well to tell the other side Snyder says he's not trying to break the unions or take over the cities and schools, but the bills say otherwise.  Also he axed the tax breaks to movie studios, which was a new industry here and lots of movies were being shot here.  Well, there won't be many being made after the credit is gone, which also is going to cause a big hit to the public employees' pension plan which guaranteed $18 million in bonds to develop a studio.  

http://www.freep.com/article/20110223/BUSINESS06/102230330 

And just for balance here are a couple of editorials, first the Republican view:

http://www.freep.com/article/20110220/OPINION05/102200532 

And the Democratic:

http://www.freep.com/article/20110220/OPINION05/102200530 

1Athena1

....all in the name of balancing the budget, of course....

There is a saying that goes something like this: every people deserves the leaders it gets. I would hate to think so badly of all Winsconsinites and Michiganders, though. 

(((Wisconsin and Michigan)))

River_Rat

(((Ohio and Indiana))) too