You don’t understand run-off/preferential voting, a system which is commonly used elsewhere in the western world (e.g. Australian state and federal elections). You’re rapidly losing credibility.
(Actually, before we realised you were serious, your first comment was hilarious. I laughed, at least.)
Man of the Year isn’t awarded to the person who has done the most good. It’s based on (roughly) who has had the biggest effect on the world, for good or bad. For example, there’s a good case to be made that Osama bin Laden should have won in 2001.
Congratulations to Bush. Kudos to those conservative voters who have acted with grace today (and I must say there’s more humility than I expected).
Perhaps, but humor me for a moment. I maintain that Hitler did not win a legitimate election. If there is a cite for a legitimate election in which Hitler emerged victorious, I will revise my comment to say that Bush’s win is the second biggest by an electorate in human history. But I still maintain that Hitler did not rise to power through a legitimate election, he pressured Hindenburg to appoint him chancellor and used the burning of the Reichstag to justify dictatorial powers. If this is incorrect, then I shall concede that point.
See, this is the problem. I know you are baffled. But I’ve spent the last two years pleading for readers to accept the position that reasonable people may disagree on points of policy. Meanwhile, the crowd of regulars here spent time telling each other they agreed with each other, as all properly-thinking people will.
Take pro-life. Many voted for Bush because he’s pro-life. Now, you may not agree with the merits of the poeition, but do you understand that for many in this country, human life begins at conception, and that life is worthy of legal protection?
Take educational vouchers. You may not agree, but do you get that many voters feel that having an alternative to public schools, especially when those schools are failing to deliver quality education, is a real plus? Do you see that many people feel that public education has become a reflection of the liberal left’s attempts at social engineering?
Under a parliamentary system, the electorate does not directly vote for a head of government. They elect members of parliament (or Reichstag, as it may be). The leader of the party with a majority of seats in the (usually) lower house becomes head of government. If no party has an absolute majority, parties seek to form coalitions to form a joint government under one leader.
I don’t have access to reference sources from home, but from Wikipedia:
After securing a coaltion, the Nazi Party formed government with Hitler as leader. They did not require 50% of the popular vote. This is an extremely common system of government.
Aldebaran your statement about the “true character” of the US population bothers me. Please don’t think that we’re all like that and please understand that MANY of us worked very hard to put this man out of office and that we are also upset about the results of this election.
No, it’s NOT the problem. This election was about much bigger things then educational vouchers. I’m against them but not rabidly so. I’m open to discussion and could be persuaded if someone could convince me that they would actually improve rather than harm education. But that issue was not even on my radar for this election.
What I was concerned about was a man who misled us into a war which was not in any way necessary or good for this country and for which there now seems to be no easy way out. I was concerned about a man who weakened environmental rules while saying he was helping the environment. I was concerned about a man who doesn’t seem to care at all about how we’re perceived in the world. I was concerned about how the world will perceive us if we were to reelect this man. I was concerned about a man who turned a huge surplus into an enormous deficit and cut taxes on the wealthy during war. I could go on but my point is that, for me, this wasn’t about friggin educational vouchers and, while I’m concerned about the abortion issue, it wasn’t just about that. I understand that people disagree on those things and I understand why. My concern is about the future well-being of this country, both financially and otherwise. What baffles me is why anyone would think that this man is good for the country. What baffles me is that anyone would think that voting for this man is in their own long-term self-interest. And apparently there are a number of Republicans who agree with me.
I know that.
Yet sadly enough history is written by the winners.
The history of the USA as we see it written right now is that the majority of US population endorses a criminal who invaded sovereign Muslim nations and killed thousands of its citizens.
The history we see written under our eyes is that the majority of the US population, knowing that this criminal in the White House is a liar about everything that was told to them about the “reasons” for their invasion of Iraq, not only forgives all these lying criminals. They don’t even bother that they tricked them into supporting their bloodthirst for war and greed for occupation: They endorse and applaud them and give them an other 4 years do do more of that.
That is once again showing the apathy, the arrogance and the hypocricy of the USA to a region of the world that has seen all too much of it to be willing to take into account that there are also other US citizens who actively tried to get this criminal bunch out of power.
Great. I really hope Aldebaran is not reflective of the world’s opinion.
Regardless, we now have to live with the fact that the nation kept this man in power. We don’t have any excuses; Kerry has conceded and we’ve validated Bush’s record by giving him another term.
And even though I didn’t vote for him, I and everyone else in this nation is responsible for his actions.
He definitely has a lot more class than I thought 15 hours ago that he was likely to show. He and Craig Benson both impressed me by admitting defeat gracefully. It’s nice to see that 2000 hasn’t set a precedent for political tantruming after all.
Because they have their hands over their ears and keep chanting “lalalala can’thearyou lalalala”?
Our international reputation is shot. Kaput. It was already shot by Bush’s actions before this, but we just put our big old rubberstamp on it yesterday. We basically just got up on the big soapbox and collectively said, “We’re the American people, and we approve his message.”
[QUOTE]
Maybe thes people should go all cheerfully to Iraq and wait for the “sock and awe” and the “you ain’t seen nothign yet” bombs of the “good man” to be dropped on their heads.
The USA elected a “good man” who was exposed as a lunatic mass murderer.
While I saw it coming, the fact that it is now reality does ot make it any less true that this says everything about the true character of the populations of the USA.
With all due respect, I think you would say the same about any President who had the temerity to attack any Moslem, anywhere. The double-standard in the Islamic world is shocking but then it’s always easier to blame other rather than focus on the cancerous rot that is inherent in most majority Moslem countries.
Bush has gotten the most votes in history so I’m told. But wasn’t the turnout much larger than usual? Since it was so tight I wonder if Kerry broke any records of his own. Does anyone know?