Friday, March 07, 2008

What we need

A primary to the primaries ... that's it ... we need to draw this whole mess out about another year to a year and a half longer. We should have the candidates to be candidates in the primaries start running in early 2005 for the 2008 election season ... THAT would make this system perfect. Wait ... maybe it would be better if we had primaries to get into the primary primaries ... oh hell let's just start with every registered voter on a ballot for their state ... top 1000 in each party go into a run off ... then the top 100 of those run and then we take the top 5 of those and they run for their state ... then we take those 50 and they run a national capaign ... and we take the top 5 of those and hold the primaries ... taking the top of those 5 to give the party nomination to.

For those that have failied to recognize my subtle writting styles that would all ... in fact ... have been sarcasim.

What we REALLY need is for these idiots that want to be President (the desire for which should pretty much disqualify them and grounds of mental instability) to stop posturing and running popularity contests and define their stances on the issues and tell us what ... EXACTLY ... they plan to do. (Or at least what they plan to attempt to do.)

Screw the primaries ... just let Obama, Clinton, Huckabee, McCain, Romney, Paul ... let the lot of 'em conduct a National campaign for the Presidency ... do away with the national party nomination (in fact I'd say do away with the national parties completely) and let each of the state parties choose a delegate to back durring the course of the race ... that way the Florida Democrat party can back ... say ... Hillary ... while the Vermont Democrat party backs Obama, the Georgia Republican party can choose to give their support to Huckabee while the Texas party gives the support to McCain ... only one rule ... no backing out ... if you're in ... you're in until November.

No primaries ... no party delegates ... just a straight up bar brawl for the office of the President ... let's really see who can capture, hold, and lead the American people without thinning the field. Let them each choose a Vice President to run with (if 2 candidates want the same person as a running mate then they have to convince to run with them or find someone else.) stake their positions on the issues and go....

Individuals, of course, could still choose thier own candidate to back and vote for, let them all go at each other ... regardless of party affiliation ... and see who is still standing when the smoke and mud clears.

The National parties, of course, would never go for that ... it takes away a good bit of their power and their 'cohesive' party line and breaks it up into smaller state party lines ...

As it stands now it looks like the Democratic primary may well go till the bitter end ... which is, if I'm reading this list right, early June. This means that we're not likely to get any meaningful discussion of issues between the candidates until late June or early July .... less than 6 months before we vote. Sounds like a lot ... but in a reality where it can take 2-3 weeks to schedule, plan, and have a single debate it means that we aren't really going to have that many opportunites to see the candidates and even see them on their own ... there's not as much chance for things to move in the world so that we can potentially hear how THEY would handle a situation if they were in the office.

The job of the President is ... in the end ... not to make law ... the President is simply the final 'check' in that check and balance ... but to maintain the security of the nation and handle international relations ... and that's what we need to see them react to is real world international situations.

To be certain we need to know where they would 'direct' us internally ... while the President can't make law, they can propose it and use their influence to direct Congress to address certain issues. They can also appoint Supreme Court Justices, and that's not a power to be given lightly ... since one can assume that they will seek to appoint like minded people to the bench.

And now I've forgotten where I was going with all of this ... so I'll just say that ... as others have said before me, politics is a race to define yourself before your opponent can define you. To that end I think that John McCain has a great opportunity here to select his VP and get out there and define this campaign and their postions on the issues ... show some leadership and set the groundwork for how this Presidential campaign is going to go. However, I agree with most of the analists that say that he'll likely hold off on that, raise money, get some photo ops to stay in the news here and there, and wait for the Democrats to choose thier runner so he can pick the VP most likely to help him against that specific opponent. In other words he's telling all of America that it's politics as normal.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

To address the meat for what you spoke about initially in your blog, the system we have now is outdated and archaic. With the current state of technology there is absolutely no reason that every election should not simply be run as a popular vote. In that way every single vote counts.

While I see some benefit to eliminating the primaries, the drawback that immediately comes to mind is that each strong candidate would try to run for themselves, leaving it impossible, or nearly impossible to have a strong president and a strong vice president.

Taldaas

Klikhizz Grimscale said...

My only disagreement with 'popular vote' is that more often than not a good majority of voters do not go through the trouble of being informed on the issues or candidates at hand .... and this is true on both sides of an issue. A lot of people either blindly vote for party affiliation, or looks, or whose add they saw before going to the voting place. The system would just become more of a popularity contest than it is now as candidates try even harder to pander to the short attention span 'Survivor: American Idol' instant gratification crowd.

Anonymous said...

I can see that side of the arguement, but right now we are giving the public an out. They don't feel responsible for who is in office because they don't feel that 1 vote counts. If we went to popular vote they would no longer have the mass of red tape to hide behind anymore.

Taldaas

Klikhizz Grimscale said...

I guess you're just more optomistic about the 'popular' part of our society than I am. ;) Personally I don't think most people realize that Popular vote isn't how the president is elected in this country as it stands.

Then again even the Democrats use a similar system in that the super delegates are ultimately the deciding factor in the nomination ... so it's technically possible for Clinton to win even if Obama win the 'popular' vote on the primaries. (oh what fun that would be ..... think of the people that will be upset over THAT outcome.)