France's Election is Today

[clowntable]

Since this also meant inheriting a lot of left wing (and right wing for that matter) political momentum, I guess quite some time.
Also my sense of Realpolitik makes me belive that it takes a lot longer for any kind of reform to get done in bigger countries.
I'm not making excuses, things could be better but at least there are some things we do right which get overlooked very often as well (i.e. no minimum wage)

[deflY]

[ QUOTE ]
Btw, reunification, how long is that going to be an excuse? Slovenia is a former communist country and has 6.3% unemployment.

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably because the living standard (...and therefore the wages and taxes) is _much_ higher in Germany. A lot of jobs in Germany have been moved to Asia or Eastern Europe. You can't really compare these two countries.


[ QUOTE ]
I think that this system (where a candidate must win by a true majority) is better than our system. The guarantee of popular-ish candidates making the final running makes it much more sensible to vote for a third party candidate (since if they don't win, it's not going to change the outcome in a negative fashion, i.e. voting green is like voting Republican). Seems to make it easier for people to vote their conscience rather than vote practically, thereby bypassing some of Duverger's law.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO the best way for people who want to vote their conscience is proportional representation & parliamentarianism.

[hmkpoker]

I'm surprised that French public spending is 55%. Isn't the USA's somewhat close to that, like 40%?

[ConstantineX]

Hmm, according to a graph I just recently searched it's 30%. But I think it helps immensely these are mainly contracts to be competed for by private companies. And the days of companies wedding themselves to expensive pension plans (read GM) are over.

[MidGe]

First round of elections only. IT will be Sarkowshy vs Royale, I hope, in the run-off!

I hope Le Pen doesn't get a guernsey this time!

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
First round of elections only. IT will be Sarkowshy vs Royale, I hope, in the run-off!

I hope Le Pen doesn't get a guernsey this time!

[/ QUOTE ]

Even though democracy is ridiculous, I think that this system (where a candidate must win by a true majority) is better than our system. The guarantee of popular-ish candidates making the final running makes it much more sensible to vote for a third party candidate (since if they don't win, it's not going to change the outcome in a negative fashion, i.e. voting green is like voting Republican). Seems to make it easier for people to vote their conscience rather than vote practically, thereby bypassing some of Duverger's law.

[MidGe]

hmkpoker,

I think it is even worse than you make it out to be. The prez of the US is not a people elected official, he is elected by the "Electoral College" whose electors are not bound by the position they took to be popularly elected. My understanding, is that this was designed to ensure that a popular vote would not really upset the real political powers agenda!

I won't even mention the interference from the judiciary in the process! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Felix_Nietzsche]

[ QUOTE ]
The prez of the US is not a people elected official, he is elected by the "Electoral College" whose electors are not bound by the position they took to be popularly elected.

[/ QUOTE ]
It is only in VERY rare situations where a person in the electorial college disregards their duties. Those that do disregard their obligation, lose their positions and NEVER get a chance to serve again.

[ QUOTE ]
My understanding, is that this was designed to ensure that a popular vote would not really upset the real political powers agenda!

[/ QUOTE ]
This is just not the case.
If you have an election where the popular vote is 50.5% versus 49.5%, then it is POSSIBLE for the 49.5% candidate to win the presidency. This occurred in the elections of 1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000. So 4 out of 55 elections. The illuminati must be very upset at their dismal performance. The conspiracy theory you cite is silly. The result of the electorial college is smaller states and rural areas have a more significant voice on who gets to be president. Otherwise candidates would ignore small population centers and smaller states would lose their clout. Most US states have a winner take all policy, with regard to electorial votes. This amplifies their influence in the role of the federal govt.

[Arnfinn Madsen]

It is quite democratic, but to make it really democratic I think they would need to add a 3rd round somehow. Reaching the 2nd round is a bit too dependant upon not having similar candidates contesting you.

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
It is quite democratic, but to make it really democratic I think they would need to add a 3rd round somehow. Reaching the 2nd round is a bit too dependant upon not having similar candidates contesting you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm a big fan of being able to cast votes for more than one candidate.