I've finally realised why the US presidential election goes on so long:

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

Heineken Helen wrote:

Pretty minimal

seriously though, to the rest of the world it's quite a joke... although still entertaining.

its pretty much a joke here too.


but whats there to say about a storm in Bhurma? It sucks, its sad, too bad for them. nothing really to argue over.

Abookamongstthemany

MrSmith wrote:

its pretty much a joke here too.


but whats there to say about a storm in Bhurma? It sucks, its sad, too bad for them. nothing really to argue over.

Agreed.

I mean things we all agree on get redundant after a page or two.

deadmosquito

Heineken Helen wrote:

Why does it take so long though? there's no actual legitimate reason other than entertainment value, is there? Maybe I'm missing something!

We had three weeks notice of our general election... it was still plenty of time for a bitter campaign. Most countries don't get much more.

well this isn't the general election. this is still state primaries. the campaign for the general election, while still long, will be much shorter this year than usual because the primaries have been so drawn out.

should they take this long? i don't think so. are they important? i kind of do think that they are. someone else in the thread asked why can't they all take place on the same day. well i think the idea behind that is that some of the smaller states that don't usually get any attention from candidates have the chance to have them visit their state. they get a chance to see politics up front, and that can only be a good thing. if all the primaries were on the same day just like the general election, then candidates would only spend time on the big states, and smaller places like iowa, new hampshire, etc would be continually ignored. of course, some states (like WV, where i live) have their primaries so late that by the time they hold them, the candidate has already been selected and they get no voice in the primary election. which is why this one is so cool to me, because there has been no decision yet.

i wish they would clean up the election process a bit, regulate it a little more, make voting methods uniform, and rotate the order the states are in. basically, streamline the process in that respect. but i still see value in having a longer primary system than just one day. it's for the little guy.

Commy

If greens get 2 or 5 or whatever percentage of the vote they should get that representation in gov't. If we have 300 seats and the green party gets 5% of the vote, they should get 15 seats.

That is if we are really trying to be a representative democracy.

BetterThanYou

NMyTree wrote:

I'm an American and it's not entertaining.

And it is a joke.

Not a hahaha....funny kind of joke. A ....what a pathetic load of crap ...joke.

It's an embarrassment.

trying to figure out who's going to represent your party in a presidential election isn't a joke and it's not an embarrassment.

an embarrassment is at the end of the presidential election in '00, it took about 2 months to figure out who won.

an embarrassment is the blatant lies that come out of every single politicians mouths (i understand you, i understand all the problems of the middle class).

an embarrassment is seeing a member of the public trying to sue mcdonald's because she burned herself with her cup of coffee.

and one of the biggest embarrassments (to me, at this moment) that isn't political or legal or pc or anything like that: watching all these lazy fucks walking around in public wearing pajama pants. put on a pair of jeans or shorts or something other than spongebob pajama pants. look, i know they're comfortable...hell, i own a shitload of them. but when i walk out my front door, i have a pair of jeans on, not fucking pajamas. it screams laziness to me, and i want to haul off and smack someone when i see them wearing them in public.

Heineken Helen

mammasan wrote:

No offense taken. I just think it's a bit ridiculous to start another thread about the election when you seem to be bothered about the very topic itself. It would have been more productive to start a thread about Burma.

See... I disagree! This is what I wanted to talk about... it's not actually about either candidate but the effect the primaries are having on news stories, on what people focus on and care about! I can't get over the ridiculousness of the whole thing... although like I said, it IS entertaining... but maybe that's where politics in America is going wrong... it's too much like a soap opera.

Heineken Helen

NMyTree wrote:

Only Democrates can............Actually, I'm not sure what exactly it is they do.

aren't they just there to make up the numbers? And to keep it all going for a couple of years coming up to the election?

Heineken Helen

NMyTree wrote:

I'm an American and it's not entertaining.

And it is a joke.

Not a hahaha....funny kind of joke. A ....what a pathetic load of crap ...joke.

It's an embarrassment.

That's the kinda joke I meant... it would be funny if it weren't so bloody serious . I'm sorry :(

Heineken Helen

MrSmith wrote:

its pretty much a joke here too.


but whats there to say about a storm in Bhurma? It sucks, its sad, too bad for them. nothing really to argue over.

good point you and abook

deadmosquito wrote:

well this isn't the general election. this is still state primaries. the campaign for the general election, while still long, will be much shorter this year than usual because the primaries have been so drawn out.

Once the names and the date is set... it IS the run up to the general election... if Obama or Hillary had have dropped out after a couple of weeks... it would be the other V McCain this whole time. The republicans must be laughing right now... hysterically!

mammasan

Heineken Helen wrote:

See... I disagree! This is what I wanted to talk about... it's not actually about either candidate but the effect the primaries are having on news stories, on what people focus on and care about! I can't get over the ridiculousness of the whole thing... although like I said, it IS entertaining... but maybe that's where politics in America is going wrong... it's too much like a soap opera.

Politics in the US is a joke.

Heineken Helen

mammasan wrote:

Politics in the US is a joke.

I think it is in most places (you should see the new government our new Taoiseach unveiled yesterday :eek: ) but the US tends to take it to an extreme

Kel Varnsen

deadmosquito wrote:

someone else in the thread asked why can't they all take place on the same day. well i think the idea behind that is that some of the smaller states that don't usually get any attention from candidates have the chance to have them visit their state. they get a chance to see politics up front, and that can only be a good thing. if all the primaries were on the same day just like the general election, then candidates would only spend time on the big states, and smaller places like iowa, new hampshire, etc would be continually ignored. .

Is it really that much better that the canidates travel from state to state (spending truckloads of money) pretty much just telling each state exactly what they want to hear just to get votes whether they mean it or not? Not to mention the fact the the general election is on the same day everywhere and the small states still manage to get some attention.

mammasan

Heineken Helen wrote:

I think it is in most places (you should see the new government our new Taoiseach unveiled yesterday :eek: ) but the US tends to take it to an extreme

We like to make our elections resemble a reality tv show as much as possible. I personally feel that our elections should be based off a Survivor type show. Throw all the candidates on a deserted island and the last one standing gets the job.

Heineken Helen

mammasan wrote:

We like to make our elections resemble a reality tv show as much as possible. I personally feel that our elections should be based off a Survivor type show. Throw all the candidates on a deserted island and the last one standing gets the job.

I would agree 100% only if by 'last one standing' you mean 'last one not eaten by the others' Now THAT would be entertainment.

mammasan

Heineken Helen wrote:

I would agree 100% only if by 'last one standing' you mean 'last one not eaten by the others' Now THAT would be entertainment.

Of course it would be an all out battle to the death.

Heineken Helen

mammasan wrote:

Of course it would be an all out battle to the death.

Nice

And if NONE of them survive... we just find more money grabbing power hungry politicians to start from the beginning... this is THEIR chance.

That's one reality show I'd actually watch

mammasan

Heineken Helen wrote:

Nice

And if NONE of them survive... we just find more money grabbing power hungry politicians to start from the beginning... this is THEIR chance.

That's one reality show I'd actually watch

If we are lucky we could wipe out every asshole in Washington DC all in one season.

Heineken Helen

mammasan wrote:

If we are lucky we could wipe out every asshole in Washington DC all in one season.

AND you're practically guaranteed the young people will vote

Rhinocerous Surprise

Heineken Helen wrote:

Nice

And if NONE of them survive... we just find more money grabbing power hungry politicians to start from the beginning... this is THEIR chance.

That's one reality show I'd actually watch

But then if they do a shitty job as president, Donald Trump shoots them in the face. Live on CNN.

Heineken Helen

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

But then if they do a shitty job as president, Donald Trump shoots them in the face. Live on CNN.

Or why not just cut the whole process and make Donald Trump president? :eek:

It's just not half as exciting though, eh?