Does Canada, Mexico, Britain, France, or anyplace else?
I know we have the longest process, but it also seems to have a number of novel steps. Are these native or imported inventions.
Also, does anyone else have a vice president?
All countries which have a president who did not elect himself (i.e. a dictator) have a vice-president and a line of succession. Many countries follow the British model of a Parliament. We didn’t because we wanted to change the name to distance ourselves from the throne of England so we borrowed some names from Imperial Rome, but we basically have a House of Commons (Legislature) and a House of Lords (Senate).
For a list of all Democracies with an electoral system like ours, refer to the CIA world Factbook:
http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/
“When the President does it, it’s not a crime” R.M. Nixon
Not every country with an elected President has a Vice-President (no offence, but it’s always struck me as a useless office). For example, France does not have a Vice-President.
If the President of France dies or is temporarily incapacitated, the President of the Senate fills in; if the President of France and the President of the Senate are both dead or temporarily incapacitated, the Cabinet fills in.
If the President of France is dead or permanently incapacitated, there is a new election. (French Constitution, article 7). (no link, sorry.)
With respect to conventions and primaries, Canadian political parties use conventions or quasi-primaries to choose the leader of the party.
The traditional method for the past 70 years or so has been the convention. By this method, the party members in each constituency elect a certain number of delegates to the convention, who then vote for the leader. In this type of leadership selection, the convention is very important and can be quite dramatic, with 2nd, 3rd, 4th ballots - not like the conventions in the U.S., where the candidate has already been determined in advance by the primary.
A more recent development is the quasi-primary, of balloting by all eligible members of the party. (I call that a quasi-primary becuase it is not governed by federal election law. The party is considered a private organisation that sets its own rules, unlike the primaries in the U.S., which I understand are governed by federal or state electoral law.)
For example, the Canadian Alliance is in the midst of a leadership selction. Last week, through a combination of personal ballots and telephone voting (“press 1 if you wish to vote for Preston Manning, press 2 if you wish to vote for Stockwell Day…”), the party had its first round. Since no candidate got a clear majority, there is now a run-off voite, with only the top two candidates; the others got knocked off.
If you want more details on the way the Alliance leadership selection works, try browsing this link: Canadian Alliance. It’s got links to several different articles.
OK, first rule of political information: Ignore anyone from Canada, even if they are right. And France? Forget about France. They don’t count. We are talking about voting Democracies, not a bunch of French people. Remember the French national anthem: “I fart in your general direction. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of Elderberries. Now: Go away, or I will taunt you a senond time-u.”
This year, for the first time, the PRI in Mexico chose their presidential candidate by a primary vote.
Sua
Thank you very much for your contribution to the fight against ignorance. In the future, please at least check the spelling of your gratuitous insults. Doing so increases their effectiveness.
I don’t know, Mannie - part of it was directed to me, and I laughed when I read it. (Can’t speak for a French person of course.)
by the way, tcburnett, in your support, I believe that India has a Vice-President, even though the President is purely a symbolic office - India has a parliamentary system, and the Prime Minister is the head of government.
Why you would need a Vice-President in these circumstances has always escaped me. At least the U.S. Veep is a heart-beat away from real power.
I suppose that since the President runs the country in the absence of the PM, the people of India felt that it would be safer to have an understudy for that person as well. I imagine it also helps out matters politically that you can give someone an office that sounds like it would be “important.”
Finally, India is a big place and there has to be a lot of ceremonial stuff that needs to be attended to.
BobT,
are you sure about that? in most parliamentary republics, the President has nothing to do with the day-to-day running of the country. There’s a Deputy Prime Minister, a member of the Parliament appointed by the Prime Minister, or just an established order of seniority in the Cabinet.