Kerry and Bush aside, in general do you prefer a tight presidential race or a landslide?

[Muenkel 0]

It appears as of now, the current race will once again be a very close one. I'm curious of people's opinions. Is this a good thing, or does it split the country? Does a landslide give the President more power? What's your thoughts? Maybe we can keep partisanship out of this.

SINCE I CAN'T CHANGE THE WORDING IN THE POLL, I'LL DEFINE IT HERE.

YES MEANS I DO PREFER A LANDSLIDE
NO MEANS I DO PREFER A CLOSE RACE.

Cut me some slack, I'm working with half a brain these days.

Chris

_________________________________________
Chris

[pajarito 0]

I prefer a landslide but I can't vote with a yes or no. Yes or no what?

[bsoder 0]

heh.. I was gonna say the same thing.

Um.. yes?
Landslide is preferable IMHO.

[Muenkel 0]

Quote

I prefer a landslide but I can't vote with a yes or no. Yes or no what?

Good catch, I'll go fix it. Remember, the head thing.

Chris

_________________________________________
Chris

[Muenkel 0]

OK, this is a flop. How do you edit the wording in the poll?

Chris

_________________________________________
Chris

[PhillyKev 0]

Landslide, that usually indicates that the candidate is a moderate and appeals to a greater majority than a radical.

[Muenkel 0]

Bump. I defined Yes and No in my text.

Sorry for the confusion.

_________________________________________
Chris

[pajarito 0]

Hmmmmm.....I would say...........................

the...answer to.......the question

is.............ummmmmmm............"

......................4."

[pajarito 0]

I mean......"yes."

[Tink1717 2]

Quote

Cut me some slack, I'm working with half a brain these days.

You must be a republican.

Skydivers don't knock on Death's door. They ring the bell and runaway... It really pisses him off.
-The World Famous Tink. (I never heard of you either!!)
AA #2069 ASA#33 POPS#8808 Swooo 1717

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Hmmmmm.....I would say...........................

the...answer to.......the question

is.............ummmmmmm............"

......................4."

Actually, the answer is 42.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Landslide, that usually indicates that the candidate is a moderate and appeals to a greater majority than a radical.

Or that the loser was not a moderate.

I imagine the answer is more than yes/no for some.

You have your candidate winning in a landslide. GOOD.
You have your candidate losing in a landslide. BAD.
You have a tight race where you either win or maintain control of Congress. OK. Split control requires consensus governing.

This year might be more about whether or not the Democrats can reclaim the legislature.

[FallRate 0]

I'm just happy I get to vote.
FallRate

[Erroll 49]

Quote

Does a landslide give the President more power?

We have just completed our general elections in SA and the ruling party (not unexpectedly) took 69% of the vote compared to around 12% by the official opposition. A landslide in anyone's langauge. One of the questions the political analysts are asking is:

Is such a majority likely to give the ruling party the confidence to try and do better, to be a benevolent and generous government, OR is it likely to make the government arrogant and authoritarian?

Does the old adage still apply? : Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

[nacmacfeegle 0]

Due to the style of American elections, each protagonist trying to illuminate the other's failings, I reckon a close race provides more entertainment.
A better fight, if you like.
From an outsider's viewpoint anyways.
"Maybe we can keep partisanship out of this. "
Hah! not likely.

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

We have just completed our general elections in SA and the ruling party (not unexpectedly) took 69% of the vote compared to around 12% by the official opposition. A landslide in anyone's langauge. One of the questions the political analysts are asking is:

Is such a majority likely to give the ruling party the confidence to try and do better, to be a benevolent and generous government, OR is it likely to make the government arrogant and authoritarian?

That's not a landslide, that's a one party state! 60/40 is a landslide. (So where did the other 19% go?)

I don't think it's necessarily bad. I saw video of people waiting hours in line to vote there. So long as the elections are open and fair and everyone is eager to participate, the politicians have to take notice. I think you run into more trouble when it appears that no one cares.

Japan is effectively a one party state with the illusion of two parties. England seems to keep one party in power far longer than seen here in the US, plus the parliamentary system guarantees a united executive/legislature.

The bigger risk is the relative newness of your current government. Absolute power achieved so quickly is more volatile due to the lack of experience in governing.

[Erroll 49]

Quote

. (So where did the other 19% go?)

To the other 19 parties contesting the election!

[quade 3]

I would prefer someone that we could -all- support.

Ok, maybe there's nobody that we could ever -all- support, but how about at least 60%? I really want a mandate from the people. This takes away the power of the electoral collage and the Supreme Court. There'd be no question that the -majority- of the people supported the President.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Erroll 49]

Quote

This takes away the power of the electoral collage

Given that we had around 20 parties contesting our elections, it was indeed an electoral collage!

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

I would prefer someone that we could -all- support.

Ok, maybe there's nobody that we could ever -all- support, but how about at least 60%? I really want a mandate from the people. This takes away the power of the electoral collage and the Supreme Court. There'd be no question that the -majority- of the people supported the President.

So if Bush wins by 60% or better, you will support him?

[quade 3]

Um, if GWB wins by 60% I think I'll have to admit that there is something wrong with my way of thinking and that perhaps my views aren't as centrist as I believe them to be.

Will you do the same if Kerry wins by 60%?

It will NOT mean that either of us will have to -support- the winner, just admit that our views aren't in the majority.

That said, I don't think there's a rat's chance in hell of either candidate winning by that large of a margin.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Um, if GWB wins by 60% I think I'll have to admit that there is something wrong with my way of thinking and that perhaps my views aren't as centrist as I believe them to be.

Will you do the same if Kerry wins by 60%?

It will NOT mean that either of us will have to -support- the winner, just admit that our views aren't in the majority.

That said, I don't think there's a rat's chance in hell of either candidate winning by that large of a margin.

Support is sort of a subjective term.
I won't support Kerry just because he wins even if he wins by 99%. I don't change my views based on popular opinion. I will support a candidate whose views are in line with my own. So the only way Kerry will get my support is if he changes his views, which isn't going to happen either.

If Kerry wins by 60% or better, I will tolerate him and respect the fact that most Americans felt he was the better candidate. I will also get more involved with the next election to make sure a mistake like electing Kerry doesn't happen again.

[sdgregory 0]

I would love to see a 100% universal victory. That would mean that everyone agrees with me!