...
>>>Yes, I am mad at him. You should be, too. He has "led" this country in the wrong direction in every conceivable way for the past six years. I defy you to name a single way we are better off than we were six years ago.
>>
>>Do you guys have the concept of "no confidence in the govt." whereby unpopularity of a leader, or the party, can lead to an unscheduled election? Or do you have to wait for them to drag the country's sorry @ss through the whole term? The PM here can call (often by being forced/coerced) an election to test faith in him/her. Thatcher and Major did this. Although a term here is nominally 5 years it can be much shorter, even with the PM being replaced mid-term.
>>
>>It's weird to think of the US being duped twice and I was surprised to realise you've still got another year to wait (what with the presedential election bandwagon having - unofficially - started about a year sooner this year)

I don't understand, what with the American love of "image", how Bush was elected over Gore (you'll probably say he actually WASN'T in truth - Florida count and all that :-) when he looks so dumb, or mealy-mouthed, or a nasty piece of work, or all the above, with his pemanent frown, and his walk with his arms held out like a B-movie robot, and his inability to string a sentence together (unlike our deputy PM, Precott - a national embarrassment whom we didn't elect - who tends to string 3 sentences incoherently into 1).

>
>
>Unfortunately we don't have anything like that. The only means of removing a President from office before the end of the four year term is impeachment, and as you know no President has ever left office that way. (Nixon would have but beat them out the door).
>
>I am sure this was intentional on the part of the founding fathers. They didn't want the President to have to be TOO responsive to public opinion. It would be hard to get much done if you have to look over your shoulder every time you make a decision.
>
>The 2008 campaign did start a bit early but not by a year, I don't think. So much depends on the early primaries. Especially if California moves its primary as they are talking about doing, a year from today we will have our two nominees. Then 8 months of mud slinging ;-(

Well it's been all over the news here how the primaries seem to be creeping forward in time each time and how they're effectively here in all but name.