 |
Who should be our next President?
This poll is closed. |
| Trip (UFC) |
   |
73 |
48.99% |
| Ninot (DIA) |
   |
76 |
51.01% |
| Total: |
149 voters |
100% |
|
|  |
 |
|
Papa Chubby
|
|
Iceland
Jun 2002 time: 05:20
|
|
Well I must also admit that I haven't diligently studied our constitution, but even without looking at it, I can tell that there is a difference between a deputy or and aide and a 2nd president. The 2nd president is the vice-president, are we now supposed to have three presidents because the candidates think the race is too close, it makes no sense at all.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Papa Chubby
|
|
Iceland
Jun 2002 time: 05:20
|
|
You can wink all you want Trip, but that does not make yours and Ninneys, as you call him, ad-hoc modification of the election sweet. I can simply state that I don't agree with it, but if you don't care, then thats just that. For now I'm going to sleep, this is just irritating me.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Malthis
|
|
San Diego, CA
Nov 2001 time: 21:20
|
|
quote: Originally posted by notyoueither
The race appears to have been tampered with and there is no way to recount.
What do you suggest we do? Other than accept a tainted result not of our own making (most probably). |
Let the other members of this democratically elected administration make a decision. The flagrant improvisation of administration with two presidents will only hurt future elections.
My promise stands.....
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
Perhaps someone should create a poll, "Should we have two Presidents?"
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Kramerman
|
 |
UT, Austin - The live music capital of the world
Jun 2002 time: 23:20
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Kramerman
Hmmmm. This is a dilly of a pickle. I don't have a problem with a duel presidency, but would much perfer a single president. In order to speed things along however (in other words, not have a re-poll), I just think we should cooperate with their decison for now, and by next election have a Supreme Court that could valify or nulify decisions like these based on their legitamacy- so this doesn't become a precedent like many fear.
I think this is a good comprimise to this problem, but I think this problem should definately stay open to debate until this poll officially closes.
Kman
|
After several minutes of deep, ponderous thought, I have come to the conclusion that I agree with myself. I also wanted to get my idea off the bottom of the freakin page and out and visable so everybody can see it.
I would just like to add:
For all those who feel we are disrupting the democratic process, had the difference in the candidates votes had been a dozen, 8, or even as few as 5, that may well be the case. However, disregarding the fact that this election may very well have been tampered with, these very narrow margin between each of our TWO candidates shows that Apolytonia is almost evenly divided on these two possible leaders. Unless foul play can be disreputed, I think that the candidates should have there duel-presidency, it would probably be a good thing considering how capable both these candidates are for the job. Again, the compromise will be that this shall never happen again, under the protection of a judicial court system.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
wervdon
|
|
Oh and as for "sharing" the presidency. I dont think we should do that. Whoever wins the poll (since thats the current election standards) should be _the_ president.
However, there is nothing to stop the winner from naming who he wants as his "adivisors" or such. Afterall George Washington made his own cabinet (which we still use) without it being expressely in the constitution.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20. Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|