Iowa speaks--Caucuses

[rehmwa 2]

I'm voting for Ralph Wiggum - He's the best 'pick'

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[G5fh84 0]

"The US system is a bit different as the dems have still wielded power over the last 8 years; in the Congress due to the relative lack of party discipline, and at various state houses."



Could you explain how it is you believe that the Democrats have still wielded power for the last eight years?

[Muenkel 0]

While it is still too early to tell, I have a strong hunch that Obama's momentum is just going to keep growing. According to polling, many demographics that were considered shoe-ins for Clinton are going to Obama. For example: African-Americans and women. He also seems to be energizing the youth in larger numbers than past elections. Clinton has a perception of representing the past and it seems the folks don't want to look back.

On the GOP side, I don't think anyone has a lock on it at all. There's no way Huckabee is going to survive the large states and urban areas. I see it between McCain and Romney with McCain being the larger threat to Obama.

_________________________________________
Chris

[PLFXpert 0]

Quote

with McCain being the larger threat to Obama.

Or the other way around.

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

"The US system is a bit different as the dems have still wielded power over the last 8 years; in the Congress due to the relative lack of party discipline, and at various state houses."



Could you explain how it is you believe that the Democrats have still wielded power for the last eight years?

From what I have seen most votes in the US Congress have GOP and DEM votes on both sides of the issue; Obviously some issues are loyalty calls to the party, but the votes of individual members must be courted on most bills. If the majority party doesn't have the votes to get something passed, they horse trade with whoever appears to be swayable regardless of party affiliation.
In UK or Canada this simply does not go on. If the government loses a vote of any consequence the government falls and there is an election. A government member who votes against the government faces serious sanctions such as exclusion from committees or parliamentary secretary positions. This seriously affects their paycheques. They could face expulsion from the caucus - meaning they will have to run as an independent next time. The net result of this means that when there is a majority government (most of the time) the opposition members are reduced to complaining to the press about how (heartless/foolish/short sighted etc.) the government is being with this particular piece of legislation. A minority party representative or senator is much more powerful than an opposition parliamentarian.
The second way is through the State Houses. Bill Clinton was not unaccustomed to power when he became the president even though the GOP had been in the Whitehouse for the previous twelve years. If Hillary or Obama become president next year they will be able to call on democratic resources from DEM State Houses that are in power or recently were.
Because UK was a unitary government when Blair took power (it has evolved into something different since) he had no Labour Party colleagues in similar position.