Do the English have a strange form of Elections?

Question

".....Listen, strange women lyin' in ponds distributin' swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony........."

Answer 1

In all seriousness, the English parliamentary system is pretty much the type of system that most foreign governments work on. Granted, strange women giving out swords only worked in medieval times, it rarely happens today.

I think the real issue is that most of fhe world does not understand the mechanics of our political system. We elect a president, state by state, and even if he doesn't get the majority of the popular vote, but wins the electoral vote, he is not officially president unless the Electoral College votes or in the case of the 2000 elections, the Supreme Court makes the ultimate decision.

In the British system, people vote locally for their MPs (Members of Parliament) and which even MP happens to be the leader of the winning party ends up as Prime Minister. In this country, technically the president is considered to be the head of his party, but he is elected separately from Congress and the Senate.

Maybe England should just get rid of a system that has served them well for over 300 years and go back to letting tarts in the lake hand out swords. And we need to develop a better way of electing presidents, though the thought of a Paris Hilton or Lindsay Lohan handing George Bush a sword is extremely scary.

Answer 2

You are confusing "Pomp and Circumstance" with the election. And guess what, we have a lot of that here in this country, too. It is just strange, because you are not to knowledgeable about it.

Answer 3

The English system is a good system, and is widely used around the world.

Answer 4

People determines who should be the leaders of the country because it is the essense of democracy..