Ron Paul is the winner so far, with almost three times the amount of votes than Barrack Obama.
And Ron Paul is the winner for most countries(also for Hong Kong).
And no one is making it up. You can't vote twice, and even if you do, it won't be counted in the final total.
Go vote too! (Warning: Try to avoid those non-constitutionalists. America is an important country, and its government's policies could affect you.)
9 comments:
Hmm... interesting...
go
and
vote.
This IS real evidence that Ron Paul is winning hearts and minds on the Internet, despite the attempts by the Mass Media to exclude him from interviews, reports, debates and anything to do with the elections.
Honestly, I still haven't decided...
come on!! Just say what you feel like saying.
If it is Ron Paul, please don't hesitate to say that, because even statistics may convince people that it isn't over.
I think my difficulty in comprehending the US election is that my political thinkings are not for big, highly populous countries.
So it's like using my skills from peeling an apple (the real fruit) to peel an orange (I don't eat oranges). So it would be me misapplying my knowledge onto something I don't really understand.
So if I say silly things, it's probably me not understanding the situation correctly.
And, if you want, my gut feeling says that I don't like any of the candidates, but of course, gut feelings don't count...
what are your political thinkings?
you mean you like to sit around inventing utopias all day long? That's what some do...
Well, only half of the time do I muddle about utopias. I mean, stuff like "9 member (unanimous, non-partisan) executive council (so no need to have *a* president), with 9 year terms and elections for 3 councillors every 3 years; responsible for managing the civil service and implementing orders from the senate; no veto, solely a democratically-voted-in overseer of the government"
and "50-member senate (voted in by approval vote, to reduce political mud-throwing) to deal with foreign affairs, and setting targets for the executive council (the executive council just implements the policies set by senate).
plus "~150 member legislative assembly, elected from local constituencies, solely to make laws.".
So, the legislation would make laws, the senate make policies (that follow the law), and the executive council gives out instructions to carry out policies the senate gives.
Eg. legislation passes law "bringing lethal poisons into the country is illegal and offenders will be criminally prosecuted"
senate would make policy "x-ray scan all bags/vehicles, and search luggages on a random basis to look out for poisons"
executive council would go to x-ray machinery firms and buy the x-ray machines, hire more customs officers, put up ads saying "don't bring poisons across borders" and so on.
Anyway, the ideal size for such a country would be medium-size, of about 1-2 billion population.
Of course this is all very nice but hardly practical. But I only do this half of the time. The other half is about how to make the HK government more democratic, gradually (but not too slowly).
P.S. I know that x-ray scanners don't really pick up poisons, so just replace it with some chemical analyser.
sounds fun to me...
You do have to realise the reason why there is a House of Representatives and a Senate in the Congress. There's a reason for the congress system.
Approval voting could be a good thing, but it's just another way of voting. I wouldn't say that it is really bad, but I just see it as unnecessary.
I don't see the need for approval voting. Of course, it may decrease "mud-slinging", but it may distract people from the actual issues and not look hard enough at them. It will also decrease incentive to candidates to actually differentiate themselves, as a person's ONE vote may no longer be that important anymore.
I tend to believe that people who dream up utopias and other ways of ruling people can lead to dangerous consequences. I tend to believe that allowing the system to evolve by itself, instead of using the people as guinea pigs for things like neo-conservatism and socialism.
I also believe that when the vote results are too close or you end up with multiple winners, you end up with an election that fails to differentiate between candidates. An example would be the social commitee "elections".
Just to repeat (again!), I don't think about "making your own system" (that much) nowadays. And in any case, it isn't practical.
Anyway, as a side remark, I'm currently trying to compile the latest version of wesnoth (1.4.1) on my desktop (running fedora 8).
Maybe, I'll just copy-n-paste the binaries of wesnoth to my eeepc. I compiled it to support an experimental 800x480 resolution (not available in the pre-compiled binaries). Still, fedora isn't supposed to be compatible with ubuntu, so there's no knowing what problems there might be.
Post a Comment