Foreign coverage of the U.S. elections reveal a lot that one might never expect. For example, change seems afoot in Nicaragua, now being governed by Ronald Reagan’s old Sandinista nemesis, Daniel Ortega. In this editorial from La Prensa of Nicaragua, which is heaped with praise for the U.S. election process, sharp criticism of Mr. Ortega’s rejection of primary elections is particularly striking.
“In every way, and despite of the defects that the U.S. primary system has, the U.S. system is far superior to the political procedures that exist in many Latin-American countries.”
EDITORIAL Translated by Miguel Guttierez February 9, 2008, Nicaragua – La Prensa – Original Article (Spanish)
The U.S. primary elections to choose Democratic and Republican Party candidates to contest the presidential election next November 4 show the strength and credibility of North American democracy and have resulted in admiration around the world. In fact, independently of which candidates the two parties select, these primaries demonstrate
the greatness of a genuinely democratic political system, unafraid of free opinion or the will of the citizenry, and one that promotes debate by all possible means.According to experts on the United States political system, the primaries of the two political parties do not follow the same pattern. On the contrary, each party establishes its own procedures and rules, but in any event, the process is based on the confidence of the politicians and citizens, voters and candidates. So with very rare exceptions, the results of the primaries aren’t challenged
by candidates and their supporters end up losing.The United States primaries are carried out through two basic processes. One is the direct vote of every citizen affiliated with the party or sympathetic to it, and takes in localities within facilities specially authorized for that purpose. The other is the so-called “caucus,” a word of native origin [may be an Algonquin Indian word for counsel ] which once referred to meetings in which tribal leaders took decisions important to and binding on the tribe. Today, the “caucus” is comprised of registered voters from each party who meet in private homes, churches, schools and any other appropriate place; and while they eat sandwiches and drink coffee, tea and other refreshments, they engage in intense political discussions before voting on their candidate of choice.
Of course the primary elections in the United States – both direct and by “caucus” – have flaws and imperfections. Moreover, the primaries elicit such intense emotion that they sometimes polarize the citizenry and even result in a state of enmity. Nevertheless, this doesn’t usually occur with the candidates, since their status as professional politicians obligates them to behave calmly and demonstrate tolerance and nobility, as much during the intense struggle to attract and convince voters as after the victory or defeat, as the case may be.
In every way, and despite of the defects that the U.S. primary system has, the U.S. system is far superior to the political procedures that exist in many Latin-American countries, where lobbies for the political parties, or worse still, in some cases the leadership or corporate bosses name their associates and supporters. In these countries the selection of candidates is done generally through “el dedazo” [the ‘big fingermark,’ the tradition of allowing the incumbent president to appoint the party’s nominee] and in the best of cases by Congresses, conventions or assemblies for which the results are fixed beforehand, or by a “consensus” between leaders of the parties and alliances.
READ ON AT WORLDMEETS.US, along with continuing coverage of the U.S. elections from around the world.
Founder and Managing Editor of Worldmeets.US