Political ideologies

[C1ay]

you all know do you not that the electoral college; each elector of it, after the general election is over, may vote for ANY person he/she wants to? provided that person is a legally able to hold the office of the usa presidency totally disregarding ANY result of the general election?

how's THAT FACT grab all of you?

It doesn't grab me at all. More than half of the states have state laws requiring their electors to follow the popular vote of the state polls so for these states your statement is completely false.

[gubba]

G'day Buffy,

 

May I indulge in a glass of your rather drinkable pinot instead? Not that the occassional beer isn't appreciated on a hot summer's evening. Buffy your eloquent analogy re. your political practises appears to reinforce my impression of how limited access is to a career in national politics. Just what is the cost of an average congressman's bi-annual(?) election campaigns? Who foots that bill? The politician's own committee or the party he nominally is a member of?

 

I agree that Blair may well be deposed from the Labour leadership soon but the point I was trying to emphasise was that in the states, in a direct presidential contest rather than a parliamentary election, he would never have stood a chance no matter the state of disarray or not of the opposition party machine, unless his direct opponent held even less credibility than himself.

 

Initially I was taken aback by your assertion that we had a multi-party system down here as I regard all anglo-saxon democracies as, essentially, strongly bi-partisan, but on reflection I think you have given me a new insight. At last I can relate a bit to all the kerfuffle that happens everytime a third candidate actually stands for president. Have the democrats forgiven poor old what's his name yet? Do any independents make it to the Houses of Congress? What about your state and/or local legislatures? cheers gub.

[Buffy]

May I indulge in a glass of your rather drinkable pinot instead?

Sure, or your Shiraz... We actually drink a lot of Aussie vino here in California...Its cheaper than the local stuff!

Buffy your eloquent analogy re. your political practises appears to reinforce my impression of how limited access is to a career in national politics.

Oh you betcha. Its all about money these days, and you definitely have to sell your soul to succeed (an interesting idiom, given what the "religious right" has done in that respect! :friday: ), but anyone can do it. I think what has to be realized is that the evolution of political center's of gravity within each party moves *very* slowly, but *very* radically. This weeks issue of The Economist has an opinion piece (Lexington, May 14 issue) on how far the Republican party has come from the old Goldwater Libertarianist/Small Government attitude that was actually a centerpiece even of Ronald Reagan's ideology, to today's Communitarian (aka "legislating morals/anti-privacy/anti-civil rights" attitude) and big government (as long as its just subsidies for big business and "defense" (aka preemptive diplomacy by other means)). Its rather amazing. As long as you fit in with the centers of power, you'll go far if you have the talent and the right friends.

 

OTOH, if you want to change everything, you're Don Quixote tilting at windmills unless you don't mind being the next Karl Rove and have impeccable timing.

I agree that Blair may well be deposed from the Labour leadership soon but the point I was trying to emphasise was that in the states, in a direct presidential contest rather than a parliamentary election, he would never have stood a chance no matter the state of disarray or not of the opposition party machine, unless his direct opponent held even less credibility than himself.

I know he's really unpopular, but the only way he would have been overthrown is by another Labour candidate in an equivalent of our "primary elections." I'd agree that the parliamentary system keeps out the dark horses, but the dark horses we have here have to stay pretty close to the party's center of gravity: Howard Dean flamed out not because of "the yell" but because he started talking about the "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party" which turned off a LOT of the core of the party, and made him look totally unelectable.

Initially I was taken aback by your assertion that we had a multi-party system down here as I regard all anglo-saxon democracies as, essentially, strongly bi-partisan, but on reflection I think you have given me a new insight.

Heh, I met one of your Liberal MPs many years ago who was a real wacko. Too bad they don't do as well as they used to!

Have the democrats forgiven poor old what's his name yet?

Mr. Dean pulled quite a coup by getting himself elected as the chairman of the Democratic Party. Its mostly because he's got a Clintonian ability to raise money, which is the primary role for that position. I don't think anyone in the party would even THINK it would be a good idea to let him run again though.

Do any independents make it to the Houses of Congress? What about your state and/or local legislatures?

You betcha, we've got one in the Senate and I think a couple in the House too. There are even places for independents in State and Local (although State less so). Interestingly although its become deregeur to be "aligned" with a party, some of our biggest cities in California--Los Angeles, San Francisco and San Diego--have elections for mayor and city councils that are officially non-partisan. When it gets to presidential politics too, you have to remember that we have a huge number of "parties" that always run but rarely get many votes, the only exceptions being real wackos who are good at getting publicity like George Wallace, Ross Perot, and Ralph Nader.

 

Cheers,

Buffy

[gubba]

G'day Biochemist,

 

- The real fallout is that qualified, intelligent, ethical folks generally will not run for federal office. -

I hope, perhaps vainly, that you are overly pessimistic. I know a few pollies at different levels downunder and most have good intentions as well as egos, but I admit it's the operators that by and large get ahead. Still, do you really think that accepting the occassional cabinet post is any sort of viable answer?

 

Your analysis of current political-media interplay is becoming, as you are no doubt aware, increasingly common as more and more of us realise the glaringly obvious but what are we to do about it? How can we help develop informed debate and /or help delegitimise populist political manipulation? In neither your country or mine can we rely on anything more than token, if that, support from the political establishments and a casual peruse of the internet is all that is required to gain an overwhelming appreciation of the task required.

 

You maintain that you have a finger on the pulse of mainstream america and claim that Mr & Mrs J Doe is nowhere as extreme as your political elites, or have I misread you? If I haven't, isn't your analysis a cause for grave concern? My analysis of self-justificatory, uninformed, alienated cynicism of the average aussie voter scares the hell out of me. We aren't easygoing and casual, as long as we're alright, we just don't care. Whilst the above is tongue and cheek and over the top, there's, unfortunately, too much truth in my sarcasm. cheers gub.

[Biochemist]

I hope, perhaps vainly, that you are overly pessimistic. I know a few pollies at different levels downunder and most have good intentions as well as egos, but I admit it's the operators that by and large get ahead.

I may be overly pessimistic, but for the moment, I don't think so.

Still, do you really think that accepting the occassional cabinet post is any sort of viable answer?

We at least get some qualified folks in government this way, and usually without the egregious. invasive public scrutiny of their personal lives.

How can we help develop informed debate and /or help delegitimise populist political manipulation?

Goodness, that is a good question. I find it useful to get folks to talk about things, but that is only the most microcosmic of influences. I still think that all politics is local, so I do my best to get local folks to talk about issues, both local and national

You maintain that you have a finger on the pulse of mainstream america and claim that Mr & Mrs J Doe is nowhere as extreme as your political elites, or have I misread you? If I haven't, isn't your analysis a cause for grave concern?

Maybe. I think of it more as an irritant. Most of middle America (according to polls) doesn't really care about most of the issues that are raging debates in Washington. Ergo, political "leaders" don't play to concerns of voters, they play to special interest elements that get media coverage. It is pretty disheartening. I don't see an obvious solution.

[gubba]

G'day biochemist,

 

Damn! There I was hoping you had all the answers! The media treatment of politics is a serious issue,cheers gub.