 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
terangba
Egypt
225 Posts |
 Posted - 14 Apr 2011 : 15:14:56
|
| Thanks for pointing out that PDOIS is not hell bent on leading. I did not know that. Please expound on the comment that the issues are more complex. |
God gave men dominion over the beasts and not over his fellow men unless they submit of their own free will. - Napoleon |
 |
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 14 Apr 2011 : 17:24:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by terangba
Thanks for pointing out that PDOIS is not hell bent on leading. I did not know that. Please expound on the comment that the issues are more complex.
AMONGST OTHERS;
1. TIME CONSTRAINT FOR FRESH START
2. ADDRESSING ALL DIFFERENCES ENCOUNTERED UNDER NADD; LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS ESPECIALLY "MERGER OF POLITICAL PARTIES" AND REGISTRATION
3. CONSIDER DEVELOPING NADD OR OTHER ALTERNATIVE THAT IS ACCEPTABLE TO ALL; FOR EXAMPLE IMPOSING OR SELLING THE IDEA OF A "UDP-LED GOVERNMENT"
2. WHAT POLITICAL AGENDA
2. WHAT TO COMPROMISE
3. WHAT "BANNER" TO ADOPT AND "NEW TERMS"
4. WHAT POLICIES TO SYNCHRONISED FOR INTERIM GOVERNMENT
5. HOW TO ALLOCATE POSITIONS UNDER A GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL UNITY; COMPETENCE, PRO-RATA, PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION OR WHAT CRITERIA
6. HOW RELEVANT ARE THE NUMBERS FOR NRP (UNDER UDP TERMS CLAIMING "MAIN" OPPOSITION); FOR EXAMPLE IF UDP LEADER LAWYER OUSAINOU DARBOE IS PRESIDENT AUTOMATICALLY NRP LEADER HAMAT BAH SHOULD BE VICE PRESIDENT OR WHAT
7. MAKING TOUGH DECISIONS AND NECESSARY SACRIFICES
NOTE:
I. POINTS 2 & 3 ARE MAJOR AND VERY COMPLEX
II. I DON'T KNOW WHAT "PARTY-LED COALITION" IS OR FIT UNDER THE CONSTITUTION OF THE GAMBIA (IF ANY); SO ANY "UDP LED GOVERNMENT" DOES NOT REPRESENT "PARTY-LED COALITION" UNDER THE CONSTITUTION OF THE GAMBIA A PARTY CAN CONTEST ALONE OR THROUGH "MERGER OF POLITICAL PARTIES"; AS GOVERNED |
Edited by - kobo on 14 Apr 2011 22:06:04 |
|
|
|
toubab1020
12309 Posts |
Posted - 14 Apr 2011 : 17:27:39
|
| Kobo,points well made, I await terangba's reply here on bantaba,maybe just maybe, there can be light after all ,we shall see,could this be a breakthrough or just more waffle ? |
"Simple is good" & I strongly dislike politics. You cannot defend the indefensible.
|
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 14 Apr 2011 : 17:49:03
|
THE ONLY BREAK THROUGH CALLS FOR SOBERNESS AND SEE THE BIGGER PICTURE OF NATIONAL INTEREST; SACRIFICING PRINCIPLES, EGOS, POLICIES; UNITE UNDER A NATIONAL FRONT AND MOBILISED ALL OPPONENTS FOR WHATEVER IT TAKES TO FIGHT 2011 FOR WINNING JAMMEH/APRC THROUGH ELECTIONS
THAT'S MAIN POLITICAL CAUSE AND ALL OPPONENTS SHARE COMMON GOAL ANY POWER STRUGGLE IS INSANE
|
Edited by - kobo on 14 Apr 2011 17:53:04 |
|
|
|
toubab1020
12309 Posts |
Posted - 14 Apr 2011 : 23:08:42
|
Yes Yes Yes Kobo,but it's politics and power and money.
The people .........? |
"Simple is good" & I strongly dislike politics. You cannot defend the indefensible.
|
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 25 Apr 2011 : 18:09:49
|
I have read all the comments but I must admit, most of them are too silly to respond to hence, I will limit myself to the following;
I don’t know who told this silly nonentity that the type of government adopted in a given country somehow determines the type of electoral system in that country. Electoral systems are determined by the electoral laws of a given country and this is irrespective of whether it is parliamentary or presidential system of government. For example, the UK is a parliamentary system of government and it has a first past the poll electoral system. On the other hand, Australia too is based on a parliamentary system of government but it has an Alternative Voting system [AV][also known as preferential voting system]. Germany too is a parliamentary system but its electoral system is based on Proportional Representation [PR].
In Africa, Zimbabwe has a second round ballot system and yet its government is based on a parliamentary system of government. Kenya too is a parliamentary government but it has a second round electoral system.
I think some people need to go back to school and learn a bit so that they can fit in here. I don’t need lectures in government. I mastered that since High School. I am only posting to compliment sober people here; those who worth their salt.
Thanks
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
Edited by - Nyarikangbanna on 25 Apr 2011 19:13:33 |
|
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
Posted - 26 Apr 2011 : 05:43:10
|
You can't response, because you have no intellectual capacity to respond.
Type of government! Election system! Type of government of parliamentary and presidential system has nothing to do with election system! Type of government adopted and electoral system! What! Don’t know what this imbecile is talking about. Sorry.
Let me repeat. Point was that Gambia has presidential system where it was difficult to have opposition unity due to following reasons.
1. No second round.
2. Presidential System where post coalition is not possible. President executive power is NOT DIVISIBLE. Parliamentarian system, power is divisible and due to parties can negotiate coalition after the election, unity of opposition is possible. In Gambian context, unity could only be negotiated before election while it is still difficult because of not having two round system.
UK, there is a coalition that was built post-election. The political parties’ unity can happen either before or after election. That is not possible in Gambian presidential system.
Australia is parliamentarian system. Both pre-post unities are possible. Voting system has nothing to do with what I am talking.
Germany too is parliamentary system. Proportional representation system has nothing to do with my point. I don’t know where these rubbish coming from.
You gave example of South Africa, India, Brazil which can only be given by an imbecile or who have no clue about the politics. Oh, yeah, maybe someone whose political knowledge is based on limited political education.
None of UK, Australia, South Africa, India, Brazil, Germany can’t not be comparable to Gambia, but only imbeciles could provide such comparisons as example.
I have no clue what you are trying to explain with the type of government and electoral system. I have no clue. You do need to learn a lot about politics.
Other than PDOIS, there is no opposition political party which has skills, knowledge of politics and understanding of Gambian realities. |
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 26 Apr 2011 : 11:47:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Nyarikangbanna
I have read all the comments but I must admit, most of them are too silly to respond to hence, I will limit myself to the following;
I don’t know who told this silly nonentity that the type of government adopted in a given country somehow determines the type of electoral system in that country. Electoral systems are determined by the electoral laws of a given country and this is irrespective of whether it is parliamentary or presidential system of government. For example, the UK is a parliamentary system of government and it has a first past the poll electoral system. On the other hand, Australia too is based on a parliamentary system of government but it has an Alternative Voting system [AV][also known as preferential voting system]. Germany too is a parliamentary system but its electoral system is based on Proportional Representation [PR].
In Africa, Zimbabwe has a second round ballot system and yet its government is based on a parliamentary system of government. Kenya too is a parliamentary government but it has a second round electoral system.
I think some people need to go back to school and learn a bit so that they can fit in here. I don’t need lectures in government. I mastered that since High School. I am only posting to compliment sober people here; those who worth their salt.
Thanks
WHERE DID TURK STATED; "that the type of government adopted in a given country somehow determines the type of electoral system in that country."
TURK IS RIGHT TO SAY "SORRY FOR NOT KNOWING WHAT YOU TALKING ABOUT"
YOU ARE LOST AND RESPONSE MISPLACED UNDER THIS TOPIC? HOWEVER TURK IS CHASING YOU AROUND AND SHATTERING YOU TO PIECES; UNTIL YOU BECAME CONFUSED MAKING DUPLICATE POSTINGS REFER BACK TO CONTININUE YOUR ARGUMENTS ON BANTABA GAMBIAN POLITICS TOPIC Its NADD vs APRC In WULI East Bye-Elections!!! UNDER http://www.gambia.dk/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=10773&whichpage=3 |
Edited by - kobo on 26 Apr 2011 12:47:30 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| Bantaba in Cyberspace |
© 2005-2024 Nijii |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
