(no subject)

[shapinglight]

To quote Giles, oh dear lord! The BBC news is trying to explain how the American electoral college system works - and I don't understand it any better at all.

:weeps - and wishes it was all over:

Comments

[kitmarlowescot2.livejournal.com]

Okay, but who decided when their is a General Election ?
Is it held every four years for the presidental candiates, or possibly every two or six years like for a House Representative or Senator ?

[stormwreath.livejournal.com]

A General Election has to be held at least once every five years, but there's no minimum period between them. Calling an election is one of the privileges of the Prime Minister. (Technically, he asks the Queen to dissolve Parliament, but in reality it's the PM's decision.) Most of the time, the PM calls the election after four years or so, trying to pick a moment when the opinion polls are in his favour.

Theoretically, a PM could try and 'bounce' the electorate by calling an election really early at a moment of high popularity. However, this could easily backfire if people resented the manipulation, so it's almost never done.

Under the constitution, what happens after the election is that the new Parliament meets, and whichever party leader is able to command a majority of MPs in the Commons becomes Prime Minister. There's then a formal ceremony where the Queen reads out a speech to Parliament describing what "My Government" plans to do - the speech, of course, was written for her by the Prime Minister - and the MPs vote to approve it.

If a Prime Minister decides to retire before an election (as Tony Blair did) or is even abandoned by their own party (as Margaret Thatcher was) then a new Prime Minister is appointed under the same system: whoever is able to command the loyalty of a majority of MPs. Almost always, this will be the person chosen by the current ruling party to be their new leader. (Gordon Brown, in the current instance). The new PM is under no obligation to call an election until the five years are up, although he might choose to anyway to give himself more democratic legitimacy: until his party has actually won an election under his leadership, he'll be considered rather less credible.

There's one other way to get a new PM: if the current one loses a "vote of no confidence". Basically, the PM stays in power as long as he has the support of a majority of MPs. If he ever loses that support, he's unable to remain in power. At that point Parliament might hold an actual, formal vote of no confidence, or else the PM might declare a vote on some other matter "an issue of confidence". That basically means "back me or sack me": it's a high-risk strategy to force waverers and the disloyal to return to the government ranks. If they don't, then the PM swould be expected to resign. Normally at that point a new General election would be called immediately.

Hope that wasn't too confusing. :-)

[kitmarlowescot2.livejournal.com]

I think I have gotten it, I have no idea how the senate leader or House one is choosen.