American politics is so interesting. I wish here in Canada there would be a 'Ron Paul' type option that veers off the mainstream horses. Quebec has been experiencing with different parties (ADQ and the recent party started by Normand Legault) but you don't have too much choice the way parliamentary politics is set up, the personality is submissive to the party. In the USA, you get your Ralph Nader's and Ron Paul's.
Canada has two and a half parties (Conservative, Liberal and NDP) with a few others gaining official party status every election cycle including the Libertarian party. If you think libertarian principles are a tough sell in the USA, imagine Canada!
What I would like to see is an "independent" option. In the U.S., registered independents float (or at least can if they want to) between parties and individual candidates. I like that.
***
I see that Paul came in third in the Iowa caucus vote. While it's no surprise Romney won, it was interesting that Rick Santorum pushed by Gingrich and Bachmann. None of these candidates inspire much. As for Romney, I don't see why being a Mormon would irritate anyone. I've met a few in my life. I even worked with a Mormon. Incredibly nice people. No matter how high strung and vulgar we got, she always remained poised, soft spoken and polite. But that be best as another story for another time.
Ron Paul's showing is impressive in that he helped purged the party of running Gingrich and Bachmann; neither of whom were serious threats to Barack Obama. I damn well keep moving forward if I were him.
Realistically, it's Mitt Romney at this point if the GOP wants a shot at the title.
Ideally, I would love seeing Ron Paul shake the foundation of contemporary American politics.
Bush, Obama, Romney. Bushobamney! Would there really be a difference?
Bush, Obama, Romney. Bushobamney! Would there really be a difference?
ReplyDeleteThe difference is in the types of people they nominate for various positions. Still not enough to get me to vote Obama, though, even though he makes much better choices on those matters.
Did Obama choose Geithner?
ReplyDeleteAnd here I thought a parliamentary form of government would encourage the proliferation of political parties. Apparently not. We always think of the US as a "two party" nation. It isn't, we have maybe a dozen. Most are unknown, tiny, and unimportant. So, in essence, we have a two and a third party system (Libertarian qualifying as a third of a party).
ReplyDeleteRomney's problem will be that Mormon label if he wins the nomination. It won't be part of the overt campaign, just part of the shadow one (by the Obama supporters). Being atheist, I don't much care what religion a candidate has unless it becomes central to his (or her) campaign. But that is extremely unlikely.
Bret is right; it is more about who the person would appoint or nominate as advisers and judges. But, unlike him, I think Obama has made very poor choices as well as some extreme ones. Geithner is one, Eric Holder is another though there are plenty of others as bad or worse (these would be in the "don't need Senate approval" positions).
What's really bad is we have 10 more months of this political circus to put up with.
I knew that of the U.S. system, but isn't that pretty much the case with everything? Coaching staffs and businessess, for example, tend to surround themselves with good (or bad) people. You always hear that in sports, "he surrounded himself with a great staff!"
ReplyDeleteHence my Geithner remark.
I think it's similar in Canada, there are many parties it's just that three garner most of the votes on a consistent basis while two control power. The rest are tiny and insignificant at this time - Green, Libertarian, Communist, Pirate etc.
Yes, we tend to forget (down here) that we are electing a CEO, a "coach", a top level administrator and not a supreme leader. How he manages, the philosophy he adheres to, the friends he has, who influenced him, his core values and beliefs are much more important than his skills in oration, the beauty and style of his wife, the cuteness of his family. The political handlers who run his campaign hide the former and emphasize the latter because, after all, the electorate is voting for the "prom king".
ReplyDeleteDo I sound sufficiently disgusted?
Nope.
ReplyDeleteCult of the personality, eh?