We're less than three weeks away from Americans choosing their next President (as well as their Congress). And the main topics of political conversation? You would hope that it's either the trillion dollar deficit, the $16 trillion debt, the impending debt ceiling debate, the fiscal cliff, or the high unemployment.
Nope. It's a yellow puppet and a piece of stationary.
When you put it that way, it does sound ridiculous.
The presidential campaign in the US started in early 2011, and throughout the middle and latter part of that year, most of the intelligent debate had been had. All of the points have been made, all of the arguments have been debated, and all of the opinions have been challenged. And this was before it became clear that Romney would become the nominee.
President Obama had the chance to make the debate worth paying attention to by throwing his ideas into the mix. Unfortunately, I have yet to see anything from Obama that explains to me why he should get a second term. (Yes, he may have brought the American economy back from the brink of collapse, but that doesn't necessarily mean he's the right man to assist the recovery.) Romney has pretty much used up all of his arguments during the primaries, leaving very few for the general election, though on this front he is actually doing better than the President.
What if the election campaign were only six weeks? This may sound strange to my American readers, but it happens in the majority of modern democracies. That said, before this campaign really starts, the candidates (or at least the party leaders and cabinet/shadow cabinet) already get vetted via their performances in parliament. US presidential candidates do not face each other in a parliamentary setting, so six weeks is not long enough to ensure that they are properly vetted. But two years is much too long, as shown by the fact that the arguments have all been used up.
Now will shortening the election campaign solve the problems plaguing this election? Not all of them; there are plenty of issues that run so deep that there is no easy solution. But shortening the campaign to, say, six months could lead us to talk about things more important than children's characters and school supplies.
Projections
Now, how are things going poll-wise for the two candidates? It's too close. State-by-state polls give Obama an advantage, but by my rough calculations, it's only 60-40 odds in his favour. Democrats hold the edge in the Senate, with 50% odds of keeping this chamber outright (without a VP tiebreak). Republicans will certainly retain control of the House, with the Democrats picking up around two seats.
But if I had to give numbers, I'd go with this:
President: Obama 275-263 Romney
Senate: Dem 50.5-49.5 Rep *
House: Dem 196-239 Rep
* I know there's no such thing as a half seat in the Senate, but with it meaning the difference between control and not, I'm making an exception to my normal rounding rules.
How long is enough to ensure that presidential candidates are given the vetting they need? Share your thoughts below!
No comments:
Post a Comment