As exciting as I'm sure your election is I really just can't beleive how long the US campaigns are.
The perils of a system with scheduled elections I'm afraid.
That's actually why I'm opposed to creating a scheduled elections system in Canada.
Is there a proposal to do so?
Yes. A portion of voters (I don't know how much, but enough to be significant on the national stage) want it, and the Conservative Party added it to their platform. When he was elected, one of the first things Harper did was set the date for the next election in four years, to simulate a fixed election date system for the next election. He talked about passing a law to make these fixed elections permanent, but in the current minority parliament I don't think he'll be able to.
This is actually the first election I've been interested in...ever.
On the Dem side, there's a politician I actually like. And some of the Republicans scare me more than a 3rd Bush term. And both sides are up in the air!
As exciting as I'm sure your election is I really just can't beleive how long the US campaigns are.
The perils of a system with scheduled elections I'm afraid.
That's actually why I'm opposed to creating a scheduled elections system in Canada.
Is there a proposal to do so?
Yes there is. The argument is that unscheduled elections allow the party in power to have an unfair advantage in the next election. If a big scandal hits, wait for another year. If the opposition is weak, call one a few years early.
The counter argument mainly involves pointing south and nodding.
I think that the internet has been for years on the path to creating what is essentially an electronic Necronomicon: A collection of blasphemous unrealities so perverse that to even glimpse at its contents, if but for a moment, is to irrevocably forfeit a portion of your sanity.
Xbox - PearlBlueS0ul, Steam
If you ever need to talk to someone, feel free to message me. Yes, that includes you.
As exciting as I'm sure your election is I really just can't beleive how long the US campaigns are.
The perils of a system with scheduled elections I'm afraid.
That's actually why I'm opposed to creating a scheduled elections system in Canada.
Is there a proposal to do so?
Yes there is. The argument is that unscheduled elections allow the party in power to have an unfair advantage in the next election. If a big scandal hits, wait for another year. If the opposition is weak, call one a few years early.
The counter argument mainly involves pointing south and nodding.
Ah.
Well, I see their issue.
Tough one.
Shinto on
0
Options
GoslingLooking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, ProbablyWatertown, WIRegistered Userregular
one of the things that's clear from this year's primaries is that we need a better primary system in place. i don't think having them all happen on one day is a good idea, because the campaigns in opening states give the candidates good chances to all equally introduce and present themselves to a national electorate that may not necessarily be familiar with them. having the primaries all happen on one day gives an unfair advantage to candidates who may have better name recognition and funding but have not necessarily proven why they are better candidates overall than others.
we do need to figure out some way of rotating the first five or six states that go through the primary process. the same few select states should not have such exclusive influence over the rest of the elections year after year.
I pitched two ideas to Feingold at a listening session:
*Rotating Regional. Five regions of 10 contiguous states each. Schedule of February to June, each region goes in one-month intervals. Random draw to see who goes first, then rotate the order. States in a region vote simultaneously. Whoever went first in Election A goes last in Election B.
*Competitive Schedule. Same February-June schedule. Order and date is based on margin of victory in the last Presidential election. The state with the narrowest margin gets the earliest possible date. The biggest blowout is given the last possible date. Everyone else is staggered out based on their margins in relation to those two.
Feingold said he liked both, but he seemed to indicate a preference for Rotating Regional.
Gosling on
I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
I wasn't aware of this. Canada just does elections whenever they feel like it?
My understanding is that most parliamentary systems are set up to have elections:
1. At least every _____ number of years - or
2. When the ruling party decideds to have them - or
3. If the ruling party fails a crucial vote in the parliament, like passing the national budget.
As exciting as I'm sure your election is I really just can't beleive how long the US campaigns are.
The perils of a system with scheduled elections I'm afraid.
That's actually why I'm opposed to creating a scheduled elections system in Canada.
Is there a proposal to do so?
Yes there is. The argument is that unscheduled elections allow the party in power to have an unfair advantage in the next election. If a big scandal hits, wait for another year. If the opposition is weak, call one a few years early.
The counter argument mainly involves pointing south and nodding.
That's another thing. There hasn't been a case in recent history of a party calling an election a few years early because they are soaring in the polls and the opposition is weak. Granted, the party has the right to do so, but I believe the Canadian electorate would get pretty tired pretty quickly of a party playing with the system for guaranteed victories, and the plan would soon backfire. No party ever calls an election after only two years in power, they always call them between 4 and 5 years after taking power. So the fixed election date won't make the major difference its supporters claim.
My understanding is that most parliamentary systems are set up to have elections:
1. At least every _____ number of years - or
2. When the ruling party decideds to have them - or
3. If the ruling party fails a crucial vote in the parliament, like passing the national budget.
That's pretty much it, yeah. Although technically, points 1 and 2 are the same. The ruling party has to decide to have an election at most 5 (*) years after the last election.
(*) The Canadian Constitution dictates that "no House of Commons and no legislative assembly shall continue for longer than five years" from the date they took power.
As exciting as I'm sure your election is I really just can't beleive how long the US campaigns are.
The perils of a system with scheduled elections I'm afraid.
As for "What is that supposed to mean?" I'm getting a little bit tired of the British press painting Obama as some kind of smooth talking lightweight just because they are peaved that their comfortable predictions of Clinton sailing easily to victory proved incorrect. This is essentially the view I think you have picked up from them.
Seriously British press - get your head out of your ass.
But didn't you watch the last Dem debate? I hear that Clinton talked policy while Obama was all style. Surely the MSM wouldn't lie to me.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
I wasn't aware of this. Canada just does elections whenever they feel like it?
My understanding is that most parliamentary systems are set up to have elections:
1. At least every _____ number of years - or
2. When the ruling party decideds to have them - or
3. If the ruling party fails a crucial vote in the parliament, like passing the national budget.
That's another thing. There hasn't been a case in recent history of a party calling an election a few years early because they are soaring in the polls and the opposition is weak. Granted, the party has the right to do so, but I believe the Canadian electorate would get pretty tired pretty quickly of a party playing with the system for guaranteed victories, and the plan would soon backfire. No party ever calls an election after only two years in power, they always call them between 4 and 5 years after taking power. So the fixed election date won't make the major difference its supporters claim.
Well, the 2000 election happened only three years after the 1997 election so it qualifies as "a few" years earlier than required. Otherwise, I do agree with you.
I think that the internet has been for years on the path to creating what is essentially an electronic Necronomicon: A collection of blasphemous unrealities so perverse that to even glimpse at its contents, if but for a moment, is to irrevocably forfeit a portion of your sanity.
Xbox - PearlBlueS0ul, Steam
If you ever need to talk to someone, feel free to message me. Yes, that includes you.
I'm one of those people not really paying much attention to the election yet, but that's because I prefer to vote for actual candidates, and I don't belong to a political party. I'll just wait until about 2 weeks before the actual election, and then read up.
What I also cannot stand is the individual state elections, so fucking tiring.
The state thing is most likely my main beef. I get that since there are so many people running that there needs to be a "playoff" system, but it's spread out too much. I like the idea of this Super Tuesday a number of states are doing, but the rest of the primaries are spread out to lead into the Dem/Gop national conventions.
What burns me out are the people claiming to be annoyed by this election cycle and saying that the candidates are all the same and fluff. Then they go on to admit that they haven't actually payed attention to debates or read the news.
But if you like being in your bubble, Hillary is all about being female, Obama about being black, and...well the Republicans are about their religion. You got one out of three.
I think slandering their opponents is fluff. In other words, it does me no good. There's plenty of journalists willing to dig out the dirt on the candidates that they shouldn't go slinging it about themselves. They could take this opportunity to explain more issues or delve deeper into theirs.
I doubt that you have really delved all that deeply into their policy papers, and previous speeches on issues.
Wherefore then this demand that they talk more about it now, in the frenzy of the final weeks of the campaign? Because you can't muster the effort for a few internet searches and are instead peaved that what you want isn't instantly provided for you by simply flipping your television on to CNN?
Christ. Man up. Self government isn't for little sallys.
Convenitent for you to ignore the first part of the sentence "explain more issues". You should run for office. There's quite a lot that goes on in gov't. on many scales. Markets and business in particular are complex. People spend their lives devoted to the subject. There is always room to delve deeper, or better explain obscure parts of strategies people may seem to disagree with.
You are right that I spend more time pining through the financials of my stock holdings/potential investments than I do on individual candidate web sites. I bow to your infinite knowledge of their policys...but those were just a few of my preferencial statements about the elections. They aren't a statement that I'm going to walk away from the whole thing in disgust.
With the utter failure of Maden Elections ’04 and Maden Elections Y2K (and its infamous Chad bug), its surprising that yet another of the series is being released. Even with the released of the Congressional Expansion Pack in ’06, turnout for the game was described as ‘apathetic’. But EA Games has assured us that, unlike previous election games, this is a whole new ballgame.
“Oh, yeah, we’re like, using motion capture and everything. You know, everyone said Kerry was poorly animated, and that his special move, you know, Sonic Sleep Attack, wasn’t that impressive.†said one of the lead animators, on the condition of confidentially. “I mean, The W just used Smear and you could totally waste Kerry, it was weak.â€
The community has responded better to this upcoming release that previous versions, due in part to the incessant media campaign, but EA also credits it to the improved game play:
“So like, we’ve got Mit Romney, who’s like a button-masher’s dream… I mean, what ever stance you want him to take, he’ll totally take it. And Huckabee with his Kung Fu WWJD move, totally awesome. And the Blue team, wow. Ok, first, you can tell them apart! Yeah, so like a total improvement just right there. Not just extra polygon counts or, um, stuff like that, you know. Totally different stuff, like Obama, he’s like stock Blue, you know, Old Skewl, yo, except, get this, he’s a different color. Yeah. And theres a woman, cause, you know, this isn’t just for guys anymore. Well. Ok, it still mostly is. We just based her off the old Bill algorithm, edited out, you know, that hack that would let you have sex with interns? And she was wicked easy to animate. I mean, we didn’t even bother with ragdoll physics, or anything, we just slapped some stills up, drew cry-eyes, you know, like in Manga?â€
There is some controversy on the platform that ’08 is being released on, however. Like all previous Elections games, this one will be only playable on Charles Babbage’s Difference Engine, though in some states it may be updated to play on ENIAC. When asked why ’08 was not released to play on a more modern system, EA responded that “It was good enough for, like, Lincoln, so, um, that’s how we’re doing it in the 21st century.†EA has not mentioned any released date for the Mac.
Sword_of_Light on
"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure. "
0
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
edited January 2008
Man, it's hard to believe that EA would actually commit to doing more than a roster update.
Man, it's hard to believe that EA would actually commit to doing more than a roster update.
Lets not forget the P-p-patent-ted Madden stut-stut-stutter and endless tangents about things that don't matter, like that cute bunny over there. Wow that's a cute bunny. Did I ever tell you I've got a bunny for each of my grandchildren last Christmas eve but accidentally ate them for a midnight sn- wait...what was I talking about?
With the utter failure of Maden Elections ’04 and Maden Elections Y2K (and its infamous Chad bug), its surprising that yet another of the series is being released. Even with the released of the Congressional Expansion Pack in ’06, turnout for the game was described as ‘apathetic’. But EA Games has assured us that, unlike previous election games, this is a whole new ballgame.
“Oh, yeah, we’re like, using motion capture and everything. You know, everyone said Kerry was poorly animated, and that his special move, you know, Sonic Sleep Attack, wasn’t that impressive.†said one of the lead animators, on the condition of confidentially. “I mean, The W just used Smear and you could totally waste Kerry, it was weak.â€
The community has responded better to this upcoming release that previous versions, due in part to the incessant media campaign, but EA also credits it to the improved game play:
“So like, we’ve got Mit Romney, who’s like a button-masher’s dream… I mean, what ever stance you want him to take, he’ll totally take it. And Huckabee with his Kung Fu WWJD move, totally awesome. And the Blue team, wow. Ok, first, you can tell them apart! Yeah, so like a total improvement just right there. Not just extra polygon counts or, um, stuff like that, you know. Totally different stuff, like Obama, he’s like stock Blue, you know, Old Skewl, yo, except, get this, he’s a different color. Yeah. And theres a woman, cause, you know, this isn’t just for guys anymore. Well. Ok, it still mostly is. We just based her off the old Bill algorithm, edited out, you know, that hack that would let you have sex with interns? And she was wicked easy to animate. I mean, we didn’t even bother with ragdoll physics, or anything, we just slapped some stills up, drew cry-eyes, you know, like in Manga?â€
There is some controversy on the platform that ’08 is being released on, however. Like all previous Elections games, this one will be only playable on Charles Babbage’s Difference Engine, though in some states it may be updated to play on ENIAC. When asked why ’08 was not released to play on a more modern system, EA responded that “It was good enough for, like, Lincoln, so, um, that’s how we’re doing it in the 21st century.†EA has not mentioned any released date for the Mac.
The fact that I understood 100% of that frightens me somewhat. My knowledge of seemingly useless trivia is large.
Then I saw Mitt Romney get challenged on some statements he made. The ending really saddened me because the tool that was with Romney actually came down on the guy for not kissing his ass. You would think that Romney would anticipate this sort of thing. Romney does appear to have a short fuse, but I guess I can get that angry if someone suddenly accused me of doing the opposite thing I just said 2 seconds ago. He looked like he really wanted to kick his ass. The old lady at the end had me cracking up.
I looked up this Rob Kaufman fellow and he helped get Bush Sr. into office. I'm not saying he is on the Romney payroll, but advice like that can't come for free.
Isn't the point of lobbyists to offer high price dinners and theater discussions who are paid by companies who have a stake in a politician's next move? The payroll thing is a load of garbage. At the same time, Kaufman's company seems to be about just what he's doing...advising. Granted I've only look a the link provided but there is no mention of big company links other than his own company's "50 state public affairs strategy" . So technically shouldn't he be on the payroll for the advisory services his own company sells?
I think Glenn was just pissed about Romney taking up so much time in the spotlight aisle. When a man needs a spotlight, there isn't time to wait in line!
Posts
That's how I feel about Romney and the Hildog.
What I also cannot stand is the individual state elections, so fucking tiring.
Is there a proposal to do so?
On the Dem side, there's a politician I actually like. And some of the Republicans scare me more than a 3rd Bush term. And both sides are up in the air!
It's like political Russian Roulette!
Yes there is. The argument is that unscheduled elections allow the party in power to have an unfair advantage in the next election. If a big scandal hits, wait for another year. If the opposition is weak, call one a few years early.
The counter argument mainly involves pointing south and nodding.
If you ever need to talk to someone, feel free to message me. Yes, that includes you.
Ah.
Well, I see their issue.
Tough one.
*Rotating Regional. Five regions of 10 contiguous states each. Schedule of February to June, each region goes in one-month intervals. Random draw to see who goes first, then rotate the order. States in a region vote simultaneously. Whoever went first in Election A goes last in Election B.
*Competitive Schedule. Same February-June schedule. Order and date is based on margin of victory in the last Presidential election. The state with the narrowest margin gets the earliest possible date. The biggest blowout is given the last possible date. Everyone else is staggered out based on their margins in relation to those two.
Feingold said he liked both, but he seemed to indicate a preference for Rotating Regional.
My understanding is that most parliamentary systems are set up to have elections:
1. At least every _____ number of years - or
2. When the ruling party decideds to have them - or
3. If the ruling party fails a crucial vote in the parliament, like passing the national budget.
That's another thing. There hasn't been a case in recent history of a party calling an election a few years early because they are soaring in the polls and the opposition is weak. Granted, the party has the right to do so, but I believe the Canadian electorate would get pretty tired pretty quickly of a party playing with the system for guaranteed victories, and the plan would soon backfire. No party ever calls an election after only two years in power, they always call them between 4 and 5 years after taking power. So the fixed election date won't make the major difference its supporters claim.
(*) The Canadian Constitution dictates that "no House of Commons and no legislative assembly shall continue for longer than five years" from the date they took power.
But didn't you watch the last Dem debate? I hear that Clinton talked policy while Obama was all style. Surely the MSM wouldn't lie to me.
Well, the 2000 election happened only three years after the 1997 election so it qualifies as "a few" years earlier than required. Otherwise, I do agree with you.
If you ever need to talk to someone, feel free to message me. Yes, that includes you.
The state thing is most likely my main beef. I get that since there are so many people running that there needs to be a "playoff" system, but it's spread out too much. I like the idea of this Super Tuesday a number of states are doing, but the rest of the primaries are spread out to lead into the Dem/Gop national conventions.
Convenitent for you to ignore the first part of the sentence "explain more issues". You should run for office. There's quite a lot that goes on in gov't. on many scales. Markets and business in particular are complex. People spend their lives devoted to the subject. There is always room to delve deeper, or better explain obscure parts of strategies people may seem to disagree with.
You are right that I spend more time pining through the financials of my stock holdings/potential investments than I do on individual candidate web sites. I bow to your infinite knowledge of their policys...but those were just a few of my preferencial statements about the elections. They aren't a statement that I'm going to walk away from the whole thing in disgust.
With the utter failure of Maden Elections ’04 and Maden Elections Y2K (and its infamous Chad bug), its surprising that yet another of the series is being released. Even with the released of the Congressional Expansion Pack in ’06, turnout for the game was described as ‘apathetic’. But EA Games has assured us that, unlike previous election games, this is a whole new ballgame.
“Oh, yeah, we’re like, using motion capture and everything. You know, everyone said Kerry was poorly animated, and that his special move, you know, Sonic Sleep Attack, wasn’t that impressive.†said one of the lead animators, on the condition of confidentially. “I mean, The W just used Smear and you could totally waste Kerry, it was weak.â€
The community has responded better to this upcoming release that previous versions, due in part to the incessant media campaign, but EA also credits it to the improved game play:
“So like, we’ve got Mit Romney, who’s like a button-masher’s dream… I mean, what ever stance you want him to take, he’ll totally take it. And Huckabee with his Kung Fu WWJD move, totally awesome. And the Blue team, wow. Ok, first, you can tell them apart! Yeah, so like a total improvement just right there. Not just extra polygon counts or, um, stuff like that, you know. Totally different stuff, like Obama, he’s like stock Blue, you know, Old Skewl, yo, except, get this, he’s a different color. Yeah. And theres a woman, cause, you know, this isn’t just for guys anymore. Well. Ok, it still mostly is. We just based her off the old Bill algorithm, edited out, you know, that hack that would let you have sex with interns? And she was wicked easy to animate. I mean, we didn’t even bother with ragdoll physics, or anything, we just slapped some stills up, drew cry-eyes, you know, like in Manga?â€
There is some controversy on the platform that ’08 is being released on, however. Like all previous Elections games, this one will be only playable on Charles Babbage’s Difference Engine, though in some states it may be updated to play on ENIAC. When asked why ’08 was not released to play on a more modern system, EA responded that “It was good enough for, like, Lincoln, so, um, that’s how we’re doing it in the 21st century.†EA has not mentioned any released date for the Mac.
Lets not forget the P-p-patent-ted Madden stut-stut-stutter and endless tangents about things that don't matter, like that cute bunny over there. Wow that's a cute bunny. Did I ever tell you I've got a bunny for each of my grandchildren last Christmas eve but accidentally ate them for a midnight sn- wait...what was I talking about?
The fact that I understood 100% of that frightens me somewhat. My knowledge of seemingly useless trivia is large.
Back on subject. According to Mr. Cafferty and some CNN viewers I'm in the minority on this one.
Then I saw Mitt Romney get challenged on some statements he made. The ending really saddened me because the tool that was with Romney actually came down on the guy for not kissing his ass. You would think that Romney would anticipate this sort of thing. Romney does appear to have a short fuse, but I guess I can get that angry if someone suddenly accused me of doing the opposite thing I just said 2 seconds ago. He looked like he really wanted to kick his ass. The old lady at the end had me cracking up.
I looked up this Rob Kaufman fellow and he helped get Bush Sr. into office. I'm not saying he is on the Romney payroll, but advice like that can't come for free.
I think Glenn was just pissed about Romney taking up so much time in the spotlight aisle. When a man needs a spotlight, there isn't time to wait in line!