Does America need a "No Confidence Vote"? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

Nosathro -> Does America need a "No Confidence Vote"? (5/7/2007 10:01:20 AM)

Reuters on Saturday May 5th released a new poll showing President Bush' approval rating is at an all time low, 28%.  If I recall this is really not new, the Presidents' approval rating has never been out of the 30s, meaning only about 1/3 think he is doing a good job.
 
Under the Constitution the President can be removed from office by empeachment (meaning the President has commited a criminal act) or resignation.   In Europe Parliamentary system there is another way, "No Confidence".  This means that the Prime Minister, the head of the government, can be removed for poor approval of his job performance.  This vote is done by his/her own party, Parliment, or by popular vote. 
 
Looking back at the current Administration, with all the problems and it's failures to manage issues, etc.  Don't you think we need a "No Confidence Vote"?



pahunkboy -> RE: Does America need a "No Confidence Vote"? (5/7/2007 10:12:44 AM)

if bush were a real man he would resign.

recall- he has political capital and intends to spend it.

the no confidence vote is teh earlierization of the 2008 presidential cycle.

But after 06- i thought finally we have some recourse. well- i have yet to see such recourse.

i dont think the US needs a no confidence clause.i DO think checks and balances need to be streghthened.



Sanity -> RE: Does America need a "No Confidence Vote"? (5/7/2007 10:18:15 AM)

With a "No Confidence" vote here, we would have had less than a year of Jimmy carter, Clinton would have been booted at his low point, and LBJ would have been OUTTA THERE, man

Lincoln would never have finished the Civil war either

So be careful what you ask for, because you just might get it



farglebargle -> RE: Does America need a "No Confidence Vote"? (5/7/2007 10:23:22 AM)

quote:


Lincoln would never have finished the Civil war either


That would have been bad how? I'm still unclear why the States who FORMED THE UNION couldn't withdraw from it, myself...




Mercnbeth -> RE: Does America need a "No Confidence Vote"? (5/7/2007 10:49:31 AM)

quote:

Don't you think we need a "No Confidence Vote"?


We have one - it's called "Midterm elections".

Thus far the resulting new power structure has delivered nothing, except a minimum wage that was below the CA State minimum. 

quote:

Last week, Rahm Emanuel, the chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, spoke to the Brookings Institution about corruption in government, using most of his 3,600-plus-word speech to harp on the so-called Republican “culture of corruption,” while implying Democrats hold the moral high ground on ethics.
After the Democrats won the majority last November, they promised to usher in two things: 1) an ambitious reform agenda of their own and 2) a new era of bipartisanship. Emanuel’s speech signals his party’s abandonment of both promises.
In fact, there has been very little progress on any of the priorities Democrats laid out in their “New Direction For America.” Lower gas prices? Stem-cell research? Withdrawal from Iraq? Pension reform? The Democrats have failed to deliver on any of these alleged priorities. Source: http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/MattMargolisMarkNoonan/2007/05/06/democrats_choose_scandalmongering_over_agenda
The next "no confidence" vote for the whole bunch comes around in November 2008. How many will be put back in because; "my guy brought home the pork" is the only consideration?



LadyEllen -> RE: Does America need a "No Confidence Vote"? (5/7/2007 11:57:59 AM)

Just for info - we plebs dont get to vote "no confidence" in our glorious leader in the UK. Its done in the House of Commons, and as often as not is a political ploy to get someone out of office who isnt popular with their party as much as not doing a reasonable job.

And 30% approval rating - going by the election turnouts and the votes polled for the winner, is about the same in the UK. We dont have the same system as the US, but we do have our own unrepresentative system that elects whoever gets the most seats in the House of Commons to government. Each seat is decided on a "first past the post" basis, so that 10001 votes for party A, 10000 for party B and 9999 for party C would still mean party A would win the seat - with only a third of the vote (+/-) - in a likely turnout of about 50% of those able to vote, but who do not because the whole damn system produces a certain level of cynicism I would presume.

There is a sytem called Proportional Representation, as used by leading democracies all over Europe - including Scotland and Wales within the UK itself - but for the UK national elections, the two parties likely to win under our unfair system dont see the benefit of it for some reason.....

E



Sinergy -> RE: Does America need a "No Confidence Vote"? (5/7/2007 12:22:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

if bush were a real man he would resign.



The issue with the "No Confidence" vote is that the Prime Minister is elected by the party in power (correct me if I am wrong, Brits, it has been a while) and holds office at their pleasure.

We have a President elected.  The only way to do something similar would be to hold an emergency election to vote the clown out of office.  This was difficult when the government was created in the 1700s, so the approach used was that our elected representatives would remove the person at the urging of their constituents.

California law allows for these sorts of special elections (witness Gray Davis vs. The Governator) although his attempt to screw the unions did not go as well as he hoped.  I suppose I am waiting for the rest of the United States to become more politically progressive, but I am not holding my breath for it to happen.

Sinergy



LadyEllen -> RE: Does America need a "No Confidence Vote"? (5/7/2007 12:25:50 PM)

Pretty much Synergy; the leader of the party which wins the election gets to be Prime Minister.

If the party falls out with their leader, they can then try a no confidence vote to remove him as leader and Prime Minister - regardless of whether he's any good at being Prime Minister. Therein lies the problem, as the people might find he's the best thing since sliced bread, but if his party doesnt like him, and they can get a few from the opposition to vote no confidence too (which the opposition invariably will if given chance), he's out on his ear.

E



Sinergy -> RE: Does America need a "No Confidence Vote"? (5/7/2007 12:28:35 PM)

LadyEllen,

I love the tag line.

In one of Douglas Adams "Hitchhikers" books he talks about a dog that failed a taste test between 3 dog foods even though the two they did not want to win had motor oil poured over them.

Sinergy



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0390625