Wouldn't that be nice?
If the candidate for president doesn't get more than 50% of the vote, then you hold a runoff between the top two.
Let's ask George "48.5%" Bush what he thinks about that.
Why is Iran more modern than the United States when it comes to presidential elections?
7 comments:
Let's ask George "48.5%" Bush what he thinks about that.
Let's ask Bill "43% and 49%" Clinton what he thinks about that.
Agreed!
What a disgrace...you hold up a country where the candidates have to be pre approved by the clergy. What's happened to Liberalism when you can liberals can even make jokes about something like the Iran elections. You need to think real hard about where your at, because liberal you ain't. Thousands of people in Iran are fighting and you literally dump on them with a post like this... good people fighting for liberal ideals... people who look to American for help... a quarter of the world's blogs are in farsi... they're looking towards us.
...and on top of it all...you think a tiny minority in the senate should have the right to veto Bolton and judges? Majority rules guys... have the guts to put it up for a vote.
Bill, I'm not following you. I like presidential runoffs. That's smart. That's the point. And re: lifetime judges and big-time diplomats, if you don't like the 'advise and consent' provision of the U.S. Constitution, then try to amend it.
60 votes are required for cloture.
So, one need employ some pretty fuzzy math to conclude that 41+ of 100 is a "tiny majority."
Sorry - that last word ought to be "minority."
Post a Comment