Silly paranormal question

[bakxierboxer]

Osama-Empty suit with no experience. A straw god to some
Hilary- Wife of a disgusting criminal ex-president
McCain-American hero, ex-pow, patriot, real experience to back up his ideas.

McCain is a tad to moderate for my tastes, well a lot more moderate for my tastes, but maybe that will work out well for him.

Either way he gets my vote.

General agreement, although I cannot figure out why in the blue-blazes the parties cannot come up with someone we'd all LIKE to vote for....

Oh.... Okey-dokey, that IS "asking a bit much"!
How about coming up with a candidate that at least 51% of the (legally) voting public WANTS to elect?

(just being able to say "at least they're not so'n'so!" does NOT make them a "desirable" candidate)

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Think about it, how often do we agree here?

Now magnify that by the whole US population. If you can ever get 8-9% of the US population to agree on one thing at one time it would be a miracle.

At the most, we can get the majority to vote for their least *un*desirable candidate...at best....

The majority of people voting will be voting for the person they are stuck with, rather than the person they want. This is due to their "Guy" not making it through the primary, so they are forced to vote for the guy that beat him.

[bakxierboxer]

Think about it, how often do we agree here?

Now magnify that by the whole US population. If you can ever get 8-9% of the US population to agree on one thing at one time it would be a miracle.

At least in theory, a more-sizable percentage of the US population IS voting in Presidential elections..... something like 120 million total popular votes were cast in 2004.
OTOH, there is some question as to just how many of them were "qualified" in the sense of actually being citizens.... or even "alive" (a rather persistent "problem" in some areas.... such as "Chicagoland")

At the most, we can get the majority to vote for their least *un*desirable candidate...at best....

That seems to be what has been going on for quite a while now....

The majority of people voting will be voting for the person they are stuck with, rather than the person they want. This is due to their "Guy" not making it through the primary, so they are forced to vote for the guy that beat him.

Somehow that does not strike me as being the "ideal solution"....

Oso and I were discussing SF themes in another thread,,,
I once read a short story in an anthology that posited elected officials being required to wear an exploding collar... when their approval rating went below the legislated minimum they were summarily/"automagically" "removed from office".
(facilitated by something approximating "the web")
This particular "solution" proved to be eminently "workable" and tended to encourage contenders to actually be capable of performing the duties of their office. It also drastically reduced the number of folks who wanted to run for office and resulted in actualizing Thomas Paine's dictum (sometimes attributed to Thomas Jefferson) "that government is best which governs least".

[bakxierboxer]

At the most, we can get the majority to vote for their least *un*desirable candidate...at best....

The majority of people voting will be voting for the person they are stuck with, rather than the person they want. This is due to their "Guy" not making it through the primary, so they are forced to vote for the guy that beat him.

"As luck would have it", tonight's Lou Dobbs show ran a call-in poll asking which of the current front-runners folks would most like to vote for in the Election.
The result?????: 81% favored "None of the above". {snicker!}

[Seppukku]

Acute or Obtuse?

Kurt........