The Reminder is making its archives back to 2003 available on our website. Please note that, due to technical limitations, archive articles are presented without the usual formatting.
BUSH OR KERRY? Many, if not most, Canadians and even a great number of Americans believe that Canadians know a lot more about the U.S.A. and its government than Americans know or care about Canada. This has a lot more to do with the educational systems than about any form of intelligence. For generations Canadian students studied North American geography and many opted for courses in American history Ð full of action, adventures and wars, by any measure much more exciting than the history of our nation. Today, with American television dominant in North America, Canadians should be even more knowledgeable about our great neighbor to the south. Yet, many Canadians are puzzled about the American electoral system, most particularly their method of electing a president. Americans have a fixed term system with presidential elections held every four years in November, and the President is restricted to two terms in office by the Constitution. The presidential race is fascinating as winning the popular vote is desirable but not the main objective, which is to win the electoral votes of individual states. States have electoral votes according to population with their total equal to their representation in Congress. This means North and South Dakota have three electors while California has 54 and New York 33. There are 538 possible electors with 270 needed to win. The system was set up way back in 1787 by the founding fathers to guard against a dictatorship or a tyranny of the majority. Four times in history the candidate for President who received the most votes did not win Ð the last time was in 2000. The candidate who gets the most votes in each state wins the state's electoral votes Ð a winner take all system. Obviously states with large populations: California, New York, Texas, Florida, Illinois, etc. are the most sought after, although candidates ignore the smaller populated states at their peril. What this all means is that nation-wide polling (done all the time and constantly by news media and parties) is less important than say in Venezuela where the candidate with the most popular votes wins. However, in the American system with the months-long primaries or nomination votes, and large conventions, coupled with intense media scrutiny, it is highly unlikely that an illiterate thug like Chavez (in Venezuela) could get elected President of the U.S.A. At present the Democratic Party has completed its primaries with Senator John Kerry a sure winner at the convention. President Bush will be unopposed which is good and bad Ð bad for him because the primaries generate a lot of publicity and provide a good opportunity to say nasty things about your opponent. The continuous Democratic Party's nomination votes generated tremendous publicity for that party, and was certainly played up by the left-leaning newspapers and groups that support the Democrats. What about the 60 year-old Kerry, a four-term junior senator from Massachusetts. Kerry is a member of the U.S. upper class like the Kennedys, Roosevelts and Rockefellers but without any real money Ð until he married it, first marrying Julia Thorne, a $300 million heiress with whom he had two daughters. Divorced in the 1980s, Kerry lucked in again, marrying Theresa Heinz, widow of Pennsylvania Republican Senator John Heinz, worth over $500 million. Fortified with all that ketchup, Kerry and his 65 year-old wife have six multi-million dollar estates including a ski lodge in Idaho. Not bad for a guy who had to mortgage his house when he first ran for the Senate. John Kerry is an enigma, a decorated Vietnam war hero who returned to the U.S. to join the anti-war movement. Kerry, together with "Hanoi Jane" Fonda (forever remembered for her visit to Hanoi and her chant "Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Minh, Viet Cong is gonna win"), railled against the U.S. government leading rallies and demonstrations. Mark, a twice shot -down, twice rescued navigator, told me that when he disembarked at San Francisco, he and his fellow veterans had to change out of their uniforms to avoid the hostile protesters. Kerry was reported as throwing his medals into a fire but later admitted they were someone else's medals. In the campaign he has tried to play up his war-hero status and downplay his ant-war past. In the U.S. senate for 19 years, John Kerry is known for suffering from the common malaise-overspeak and doublespeak. He constantly expresses an opinion on everything, often speaking one way and voting the other. He voted for the war with Iraq, but now speaks against it; he advocates spending more money on the armed forces but voted to cut the defence budget. Republicans are painting him as a loose cannon, who speaks on both sides of the issues and is weak on security. One New York Times writer notes that the Democrats, "the party of the poor, the underprivileged, the unions, and the blacks won't nominate a guy unless his family had an upper-deck berth on the Mayflower", and finds it ironic that though a lot of Democrats can't afford one house, they will support a guy with six. How will Kerry do in the general election? His latest outburst was to claim he has met foreign leaders who want him to beat Bush, but refuses to name them. He has been endorsed by Kim Jong II, the brutal dictator of North Korea, and several French politicians. Senators seldom win the presidency (the last being John F. Kennedy), and a ticket of two senators is unheard of. As well, no sitting President has ever been defeated with America at war. The campaign is expected to be close and dirty as Republicans will attempt to have Kerry self-destruct. It looks like an exciting summer in the U.S.A.
