have your say

What do you think of the drawn-out U.S. presidential election system whereby electoral votes determine who wins one year from now?


©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

A bit like how we're forced to start celebrating Xmas a few months before the actual event, only worse. I'm just thinking of all the time and money wasted in US elections.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Should make it a 6 year stint and not allowed to run again.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

It's tedious and tiresome; and only compounded by the world's media following every minutiae of it from (early) start to finish.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

It was originally set up to protect smaller states, but now seems to give them larger influence than they deserve. It should at the very least be modified.

-1 ( +1 / -1 )

Huge yawnfest that with its 'patriotism, flag-waving or chest-beating*' does nothing to attract the outside world. All that polarisation, evangelical rallying and dirty-tricks public back-stabbing is really quite off-putting and not a good advertisement for democracy at its best.

*Quote from the US Corporation for Travel Promotion, having trouble attracting tourists

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I think it's a fraud.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Stupid waste of time and money. Democracy can function a heck of a lot more quickly and cheaply than it does in the US. By the time a candidate wins office he or she is positioning themselves for the next run - when do they actually govern?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Beats the heck out of a couple of weeks of guys standing on top of trucks with white gloves on and a bunch of posters hung outside public buildings, like in Japan. May be tedious, but at least there is an honest debate of the issues and time for folks to make an intelligent choice, not just a beauty/popularity contest. If Rick Perry were running in Japan, he would have won in a landslide. But since he had to actually answer questions/debate his opponents, the voters fould out he is nothing but a well-rehearsed empty suit, like most J-pols.

0 ( +1 / -2 )

May be tedious, but at least there is an honest debate of the issues and time for folks to make an intelligent choice, not just a beauty/popularity contest.

You've never lived in the US, have you? There's no honest debate about the issues whatsoever. At best it's a battle of soundbites. And a large amount of people don't make an intelligent choice; they just vote for whatever "team" they happen to favor even if if the candidate is crap.

2 ( +3 / -0 )

Honest debate??? LOL. I can predict at least 35 states which party they are going to vote in favor of. And this is before there is even a debate!!

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

May be tedious, but at least there is an honest debate of the issues and time for folks to make an intelligent choice


-2 ( +1 / -2 )

It's not necessary for so many of your posts to be an anti-Japan rant. In fact, there is no need for you even to mention Japan on this thread. A very poor contribution from you.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

At least there's no new president every 6 months. A big country like the US requires some period of stability for things to affect up to the many far corners of its land. But not stay too long to become despotic when change is warranted.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The debates and interviews with candidates are very open in the states.

I find them here in Japan not so. Too loud, with people waving from a van, saying the candidates name over and over again.

Other countries do not even allow debates.

The American system although not perfect is pretty open.

I do think a president would have a much better chance of getting things done though if they did not have to spend the last year and a half worrying about getting elected again. Make it 6 years and it would be better.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Look at what we got from the last presidential election: Obama. After all that stuff, that's the best the voters could come up with? But then the Republicans didn't come up with any bright spots either. The way things are looking right now, both parties are putting up another field of losers ... but, yet, one of them has got to win in the end. Another waste of time ... ??

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

In general, the system is not too bad in that it provides insights into the controversies inside each party as opposed to the solid blocks which have been formed by closed door negotiations in other countries. In practice it has developed into a huge mud slinging party, though the latter may be more attributed to the general decline of political culture in the US.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The question is unclear - is this a question about the drawn-out campaign process, or the electoral college system? I'd like to ditch 'em both, but that ain't happening...

2 ( +2 / -0 )

^^^ What John said about the question. Talk about muddying the point of the question! This poorly constructed question demands two answers.

(Question 1:) What do you think of the drawn-out U.S. presidential election system?

(Answer 1:) I think it's TOO long. "Back in the day" before instant mass-communication, campaigns had to run for quite a while in order to let ALL the public hear what the candidate has to say on a given subject. Now with instant coverage and dissemination, all that campaigning is just a way to guarantee only the richest of coffers can afford to sponsor a candidate. (Solution:) Have the candidates announce 1 year prior to the election, have two debates per party a month later to pare-down the choices, have two debates between the resulting party winners one month prior to the election, then hold the election.

(Question 2:) What do you think of the U.S. presidential election system whereby electoral votes determine who wins?

(Answer 2:) It's an archaic device created in the 1780's to prevent a relatively illiterate population from choosing their leader and as a result completely throws-out up to 49% of a state population's vote. Today, the literacy rate is MUCH higher and the general public is certainly capable of deciding on their own who they want in the White House without "help" from an electoral "college".

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Comparing Olympus to Enron is like comparing dog poop on the sidewalk to sewage treatment center. I agree with herefornow. Such comparison is absurd.

As for the electoral votes, it's probably frustrating for red voters voting in historically blue states and vice versa for one wonders why he/ she voted any way.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

For those who stated that stability, like the long term of presidency, is necessary, then why is the current president keep harping on the fact that he couldn't get the results because of the large damage that the previous administration had caused even until at this moment?

Is that simply a weak excuse or does he have a legitimate point?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Interesting that most of the comments here don't relate to the question of the electoral system. Is it because not many understand it?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

America needs to go with a straight popular vote. However, to obtain the right to vote should require a test of some very general knowledge. If you cannot point to Iraq and Afghanistan on a map, you should be shown the door. And people of certain backrounds should be legally required to take the test and vote if they pass.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Biased one sided views

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites