REX NON POTEST PECCARE

Re-edited April 08 2020.

«In the linear, global, historiographical approach, modern history (the "modern period," the "modern era," "modern times") is the history of the period following post-classical history (in Europe known as the "Middle Ages"), spanning from about 1500 to the present.»

According to the site oldest.org, The United States is the first democracy of the modern world, because it started in 1788.

Many of the principles of the previous oldest democracy according to the same site linked above have been simply transferred. One of them was the principle of sovereign immunity.

As a result some of the attributes and privileges of the King from British Constitution have been transferred to the president. One of them is the power of pardon.

However, presidential elections had to be invented. Due to vastness of country, the great distances and lack of means of communication at the time when they where first held campaigns still last 384 days and they still do so. A very complicated process that few understand. With existent "modern" communications, US election system is now outdated. Nominations are mixed with elections. «The presidential primary elections and caucuses held in the various states, the District of Columbia, and territories of the United States form part of the nominating process of candidates for United States presidential elections.»

Some of the issues with elections being such a lengthy process is... well, people can change their mind. After one year, people who voted for one candidate in one of the first states during primaries may wish to have voted with another! Some die, some come to voting age. Primaries not being held simultaneously in different states, results in the one state voting may influence the next one.

But in the end the weirdest part is people who are not registered with the only two parties get to choose from only the two "remaining" candidates after primaries.

In most modern European countries campaigns length varies but do not have an official time frame, state does not get involved in nominations and elections themselves last at most a couple of weeks, in one or two rounds. In the first round participate all candidates that have gathered a number of signatures and if none obtained 50% of the votes the first two go in the second round.

In France by example, primaries are still held within the big parties (to avoid of course having more than one candidate) while anybody can candidate if they can gather more than 500 signatures.

But there are other aspects regarding this lengthy process that imitates... a sports championship? Candidates during debates eliminate each other in debates from state to state. The rise of a new occupations.

The professional candidate. Today's drop of Bernie Sanders reminded of this. He was a candidate for many years. With him, there go away some of the best ideas i ever hard of which some maybe would have been survived in other forms with other candidates. I call him "an issue killer". Here is another example:

"Harold Stassen is perhaps the most famous and distinguished perennial presidential candidate in U.S. history, along with Ralph Nader. A one-time governor of Minnesota and former president of the University of Pennsylvania, he ran for the Republican nomination for president nine times between 1944 and 1992."

The protesting candidate.

"Pat Paulsen, a comedian best known for his appearances on the Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour, first ran for president in 1968 as both a joke and a protest. He ran again in 1972 and in succeeding elections until 1996, one year prior to his death."

Another consequence is US cannot hold what is called in other states "snap elections". Something that by example in the UK has happened 3 times within last 5 years.

The age old questions about American elections. Can a (still sponsored) "independent" candidate win against one backed by one of the two major parties? I don't think it ever happened. The reason. The same one year long campaign. Only those having a big party to back them up can afford the costs to the end. Traveling campaign tradition these days implies huge campaign teams with big expenses. I think, if we say there are 20 candidates with 500 staff on average, there are  up to a total of 100.000 people employed by the elections. To those we need to add local organizers and why not, people employed by media to cover each event.

Writers (not mentioned in the article), communication director. Speeches are read by candidates from prompters. The issue of how their donors and volunteers are going to be of course repaid, if.

"A communications director who oversees the entirety of the campaign's messaging, message planning, media relations, and the whole communications staff."

The alternative, a one month long campaign with debates, with two election rounds within 2 weeks would allow way more candidates to participate in the first round, less one year long distraction and fewer illusions because anybody knew from a long time ago Sanders will not going to go into the finals.

And the issue of the campaigning president. Isn't 384 days campaign too big of a distraction for the current president.