2008/4/9 Dave Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > maybe someone should tell the government? apparently we're all wasting > > > our time voting for them, and 'rough consensus' should be used to > > > decide who's in power. > On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 12:31 AM, Bruce Cowan > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, 2008-04-07 at 14:57 +0300, SteveC wrote: > > > Like, er, electing President Bush, or Prime Minister Gordon Brown (no > > > election) ? > > > > I'm a pedant, but you never vote for a Prime Minister. You vote for your > > local MP and the leader of the party with the most MPs gets to be Prime > > Minister. > > Well, if we're being pedantic then the Queen appoints the PM, and by > convention she chooses the person most likely to have the confidence > of parliament. There's nothing other than "constitutional convention" > to stop her picking anyone she likes, whether they're an MP or not, > and whether parliament likes it or not -- luckily the convention seems > quite strong. So all in all, there's not much voting going on, or > where there is it isn't necessarily treated in the way you'd expect, > which was kind of Steve's point.
well, if we're being really, really pedantic, then i wasn't talking about that government, but the one here (nz), where there are no damn monarchs choosing leaders, and no hanging chads or cheating governors to screw things up: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781359.html so my point stands _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
