Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
How can Americans accept delaying an election?
Sen. Chris Dodd on CNN just proposed delaying elections in Pakistan because of Benazir Bhutto's assasination.
In the U.S., elections are even more sacred than church on Sunday. The country would erupt in riots and revolution if Bush suspended elections in 2008, or changed the date.
Wouldn't it?
So why can't Pakistan have an election as planned? Is it because the country's constitution appears to mean nothing to a military dictatorship? Is it because elections have no meaning there under the circumstances?
Or is it that some Americans don't want to accept the the Bush Regime has ALWAYS been wrong, and the elections in the U.S. might be tainted - AGAIN?
5 Answers
- Michelle MLv 51 decade agoFavorite Answer
First, Sen. Chris Dodd is a Democrat, so I'm not sure where you're pulling this "Bush Regime" comment out of.
Second, we can't compare the US with Pakistan. If our country were in violent turmoil and Hillary or Rudy or Obama or Huckabee (or whoever the candidates will be) were murdered 2 weeks before the election, maybe we would consider delaying the elections until things settled down.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
These are two different countries, Pakistan and USA. I'm sure there are valid reasons to them to do what they do even if it's not valid for others. I agree that things would erupt if Bush had the authority to suspend elections, but I don't think he can do that. That would be a dictatorship. Although sometimes I think he would love that and has been trying so throughout his term. That bass tard! :)
- lemmonsLv 45 years ago
i do no longer think of so. McCain has slipped so severely in popularity rankings at present that i do no longer think of that's going to be an exceedingly close election. i could guess he will probably lose by means of a minimum of a pair share factors, and there is not any element relatively contesting that. in case you lose, you lose, and in case you win, you win. the sole way i will relatively see Obama dropping is that if the greater youthful person vote casting bloc, traditionally an exceedingly unreliable vote casting bloc, fails to certainly vote and if racism comes into play. i do in contrast to pointing out racism as a reason as to why he'd lose with the aid of fact I hate it while human beings play the race card (it is so drained, please provide up utilising it, the conventional public of the time that excuse isn't even respected) yet once you pollpeople in individual, they're greater probable to assert computing device issues quite than in simple terms say the blatant certainty. The polls taken so some distance by means of that regard may be skewed.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
WHAT???? That woman was THE party. Without her it is in disarray and does not have the same legitimacy. She was leader of the most well known party nationally in Pakistan - without her they are going to have serious problems. Out of respect for her and her work - and the likelihood that her party would not be elected without her - it is up to democratic nations to do what is best to ensure extremists and miliatants are not elected.