Bush says U.S. election sets example for budding democracies

The last two elections would not have stood up to any sort of democratic scrutiny and judging by all the problems with the machines this time it would not either.

It is a complete joke that the most technological advanced country in the world cannot do a simple thing like run an election.

And, I believe, the tyranny of the "ballot box" should not oppress a minority. This is in reference to California prop 8, Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry. Voters should not have the ability to take rights away from a minority.

LMFAO

The best example we could set is to show the world how we get rid of a bad party in the White House and show the the new party in charge all the comforts of the Oval Office.

the last two elections showed that the losing party could not come to terms with the results and the country remains fractured. This election will not change things. Bottomline is both political parties are corrupt and anybody who puts faith in these guys are fools in which politicians count on.

I would almost agree with Bush except for what happens on election day. Who gets to vote; how voting is done; the voting forms (paper or computer); how votes are counted (or not)...

What happens on election day is the most suspenseful day for all the wrong reasons. It does set an example, but not how to run a clean and transparent election. Perhaps the lessor democratic nations can do that like Canada, Finland, Australia, New Zealand, Iceland, Sweden ....

79 more days and george bush is history and Barack Obama will be our next president. < :-)

79 more days and Barack Obama needs to start living up to his own rhetoric.

"Bush says U.S. election sets example for budding democracies"

Had to read this twice, though it said "Bush says U.S. election sets example of budding democracies"

In terms of an example, don't know if the current US system is a good one or not. One big issue is money. The funds that both parties spend on the election is mind-blogging. For all the talk about Obama being a better candidate than McCain, doesn't it just come down to the fact that Obama has deeper pockets than his rival and can thus more effectively manipulate the image that he wants to convey. Moreover, the fact that many people in the US don't vote worries me. Not a very efficient use of all these funds spent on campaigns. "donkeying" your vote is one thing, but can apathy seriously be considered as a manifestation of somebody exercising their democratic right to vote?

Another thing that piddles me about how elections are conducted in the US is related to the candidates themselves. Some folks seem more content on dragging their opponents reputations through the mud rather than selling their own ideas. Is this what democracy is really all about?

"Bush, who cast an absentee ballot"

Is he going to be out of the country November 4?

Yang - "LMFAO"

All the way to the Funny Farm, right?

Is he going to be out of the country November 4?

If he is, here's hoping he stays out.

Perhaps the lessor democratic nations can do that like Canada, Finland, Australia, New Zealand, Iceland, Sweden ....

thanx for the chuckle.

why can't the barack obamas in these nations rise to political positions of any real power or consequence?

Bush said that the spirited campaign between McCain and front-runner, Democratic Sen Barack Obama, reflects a political competition that is an “essential part of a healthy democracy.”

It's just a pity both of Bush's campaigns and John McCain's didn't and don't.

All the way to the Funny Farm, right?

Yu betcha, all the way to make sure shrub is planted and stays. No one wants the American model no more, it's been bastardised by its like.

One big issue is money. The funds that both parties spend on the election is mind-blogging

It's actually not when you compare it with other things the US spends money on. The classic example is that the US spends more on chewing gum than the Presidential and all Congressional elections combined. With a billion dollars raised and 300 million people it's just over $3 per person. But when you see the numbers on their own without context it's hard to see that.

You also have the issue where people don't like to contribute to a candidate if it looks like they can't win. So in races where someone has 60% of the votes and the other person has 40% of the votes people just don't contribute to the 40% guy. So by the time the election rolls around people see the difference in money and think that's how the candidate got elected....but in reality he got the money by already being in the lead. They have a lot of new studies over the last 5 years that point to this conclusion.

Obama has dwarfed McCain in contributions but it's still a tight race. Besides, if money can buy elections then we'd all be talking about President Perot...heh.

YangYong: No one wants the American model no more, it's been bastardised by its like.

True. We all want the Chinese model. The one that sells for $0.99. ;)

I am going to elaborate - off the racism comment. Still mystified how USA's election system is a "representative democracy". Only two people have a shot, those in States traditionally pro-Republican or pro-Democratic who want to vote the other way know their vote in hopeless and if you don't like either candidate, then you are really just out of luck. At least in my country, if you don't like the big guys, there are lots of little guys in there you can pick from AND it is almost guaranteed that some of the little guys will then get in to parliament and actually represent their voters. (case in point: Green party/Maori party). Granted, USA's system is nowhere near the worst hey it beats Zimbabwe's elections hands down - BUT it surely isn't a model the world should adopt.

Granted, USA's system is nowhere near the worst hey it beats Zimbabwe's elections hands down - BUT it surely isn't a model the world should adopt.

i don't think that is what bush was saying.

did we impose our system on germany or japan?

liberated iraq has a parliamentary system...

Bush said that the spirited campaign between McCain and front-runner, Democratic Sen Barack Obama, reflects a political competition that is an “essential part of a healthy democracy.”

I see it as the unfortunate and embarrassing part of USA democracy, but OK

ImperiumMondi -

i don't think that is what bush was saying.

Reading back, I suppose he didn't say it outright. But he did label it as "one of America’s greatest strengths.”

I think Bush was talking more about the overall concept of democracy, not necessarily comparing the specifics of each democracy or comparing them to each other.

I think Bush is right when he says that "our system of representative democracy is one of America's greatest strengths". I think it would be slightly more accurate to say "has been" instead of "is". I don't think it is at all clear that this particular system can continue to be a strength.

I tend to agree with Churchill that "democracy is a terrible system, but the best we've had so far". And what makes it the best, I believe, is not so much that democracy comes up with the right answers. I don't think it necessarily does any more than the market does. The strenth, I think is the more or less orderly succession in government.

Nonetheless, I think this particular election sets a rather bad example for budding democracies. I don't think budding democracies that do not have long-standing antecedents of formal systems of two-party opposition (king/nobles, crown/parliament, Tories/Whigs) can handle the divisiveness that often accompanies the system. I'm not sure we can either.

I think a parliamentary system would be a better model for budding democracies. And perhaps for America, too.

The US has a form of democracy yes, but it's about the minimum you could have and still call yourself a democracy. Firstly, a lot of donations come from big business so only parties that support big business get donations. Secondly, there is no proportional representation so voting for a third party is 'throwing your vote away'. Hence, US is doomed to two very similar parties until the end of time.

Bush said....

Why is it that I just tune out after those two words? Experience perhaps?

liberated iraq has a parliamentary system...

...that apparently Bush can ignore for however long he wants our troops to stay in Iraq...

US style democracy is good but not good enough. Compulsory maximum 8 years for one president needs to change. Declaration of war to other country should be done through national referendum.

I like how sez puts this today.

I will say this, I for one am a bit concerned about dems taking over almost everything. And I would be had it been repub. Its bad enough we virtually only have two choices and once the choice is made, only one takes the lead with the other having to leave the scene even though that other may have had a 49% vote. Hardy majority rule and minority rights implied. Some people are praising, ranting and raving for the fact that the DEms are going to take almost all of the senate and the house, I on the other hand am worried. The best thing that comes to my mind when I see this is from the Da Vinci Code when some Roman leader had asked "Who will guard the guards". We have already seen what happens when places have one group making all the decisions for the people. What's next, leaders for life, thought control...

cow76: so only parties that support big business get donations

...as opposed to turning their backs on big business, the biggest tax payers and employers in the country?

skip: Dems are going to take almost all of the senate and the house, I on the other hand am worried.

Yep. It's their chance to show the US what they can do as a party and they won't have any excuses. They have an amazing opportunity and it's up to them to decide what they do with it.

CavemanLawyer: Why is it that I just tune out after those two words?

It just shows how your primary concern is being on the other side of Bush and the actual issues take a back seat to that. I'll be glad when Bush is gone because it should help moderates talk about the issues without people such as yourself wasting our time with "politics first, country second" line of thinking.

Yep. It's their chance to show the US what they can do as a party and they won't have any excuses. They have an amazing opportunity and it's up to them to decide what they do with it." So, I take you are not at all concerned? I fear giving them carte blanche which is something we have seen in both parties depending on what news source you frequent. If you look hard enough, you'll find that dems have committed quite a many illegal activities just as much as repubs.

BTW have we ever had a party with this much control in the US? President, Senate, and House?

it's up to them to decide what they do with it." that statement is so scary.

Afraid? Not really....but then again I'm a Democrat. ;) I'm actually kind of excited about it. It's true they'll have more power than most US governments in the past, but that will be good or bad depending on their policies.

I thought to myself that this must be part of a SNL skit. I had to rub my eyes and wait for someone to yell out,"Live from New York, it`s Saturday Night!".

But it appears he is saying it with a straight face.LOL

The far right wing of the Republican party has used all forms of dirty tricks to push their agenda to their base. They have also attempted to scare the less fortunate with tactics used by the SA as it attempted to take full power in Germany in the 1930`s.

The far right elements of the Republican party know full　well what they are doing is illegal. But they still push on knowing that they will not win unless they commit these acts.

Funny how one of the architects of this is touting democracy when he has attempted to suppress it in his own nation. I hope that one day he and his ilk will fall and bring freedom of the mind.

I hope Obama wins and turns this nation around from the dangerous ride it has been on for the last 14 years. Freedom of expression also means freedom of thought.

Hope and freedom comes with a price.......

They have also attempted to scare the less fortunate with tactics used by the SA as it attempted to take full power in Germany in the 1930`s.

pretty serious charge. but without giving any specifics you just appear excitable and silly.

Afraid? Not really....but then again I'm a Democrat. ;) I'm actually kind of excited about it. It's true they'll have more power than most US governments in the past, but that will be good or bad depending on their policies." Well, I am neither repub or dem. It was bad enough we had two parties controlling things, now we are going to basically have one? And who are the ones who are going to control things? Some rich gated community white folks who will keep themselves rich but tell everyone how much they are helping them.

ImperiumMundi at 03:47 PM JST - 3rd November pretty serious charge. but without giving any specifics you just appear excitable and silly.

Well if you wish to know, let us take a look.....btw google anyone of these and guess what.....They have happened and are happening...

Phony Virginia Flier Tells Dems To Vote November 5...Wonder how many will believe this one...

Court blocks Ohio vote challenge....Hmm wonder who wanted to stop people from voting? Google it and be surprised

Voter Suppression Incidents 2008....google it and be surprised

Btw do　not take my word at all......Do your own searches and be surprised.

I used to be a Republican fanatic that believed the party line until I started to do my own research.

Took me a long time to accept the facts but now I am an Independent.

Do your own fact checks do not believe what folks tell you......Suppression of votes is attempted all the time. Do your own research!

You asked and I provided now it is up to you.