Post 2848025 by keithzg@mastodon.club
 (DIR) More posts by keithzg@mastodon.club
 (DIR) Post #2847449 by gamehawk@mastodon.social
       2019-01-10T23:04:19Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       I don't fully understand the whole "forming a new government" that places like the UK do, but whatever it is, it's gotta be better than "keeping the old government but making its employees work unpaid or not at all."https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/us-government-shutdown-leaves-its-sites-insecure-tls-certs-expired/
       
 (DIR) Post #2847450 by Canageek@cybre.space
       2019-01-10T23:07:07Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @gamehawk Basically if the party in charge fails at passing a certain level of law (crown speech [statement of intent a party puts out when taking office], budget, anything needed for the government to actually function) then that party has to step down.Then either (fairly rarely in Canada) a different coalition of parties can try and take over or a new election is called.
       
 (DIR) Post #2847749 by gamehawk@mastodon.social
       2019-01-10T23:18:36Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @Canageek Yeah, it's the things around it that continuously surprise me... like a no-confidence vote in a PM means the whole party steps down, or no?
       
 (DIR) Post #2847771 by Canageek@cybre.space
       2019-01-10T23:19:22Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @gamehawk Well, the party can change its leader internally without a new election, but yeah. The vote is confidence in the party, not the leader.
       
 (DIR) Post #2847948 by gamehawk@mastodon.social
       2019-01-10T23:24:56Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @Canageek So was last month's UK vote on May or the party?(AFAICT Brexit is every bit as dumb, if not dumber, than the shutdown so obviously the parliamentary system isn't *entirely* a solution...)
       
 (DIR) Post #2848025 by keithzg@mastodon.club
       2019-01-10T23:23:49Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @Canageek@gamehawkHonestly both the U.S. and Canada could benefit from having more minority governments (although obviously that isn't immediately possible in the U.S., but we have a chance for one in the next election in Canada later this year).There's this meme about minority governments not getting things done, but coalition Canadian federal governments have done for example: * Universal healthcare * Pension * The Canadian flag!
       
 (DIR) Post #2848026 by gamehawk@mastodon.social
       2019-01-10T23:25:45Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @keithzg @Canageek We, uh, kinda *have* a minority government, and that seems to be the problem. 😬
       
 (DIR) Post #2848027 by Canageek@cybre.space
       2019-01-10T23:26:55Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @gamehawk @keithzg As I understand it that was complicated and may have been two votes? I don't spend a ton of time following UK politics.
       
 (DIR) Post #2848116 by gamehawk@mastodon.social
       2019-01-10T23:30:21Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @Canageek @keithzg I'm pretty sure NPR covers UK politics more than Canadian or Mexican which seems a little weird, geographically.
       
 (DIR) Post #2852226 by keithzg@mastodon.club
       2019-01-10T23:27:30Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @gamehawk@CanageekHah, fair point, but you just have a government that can't quite make a majority—which is different than if you had more than two parties, and coalitions of them could form, dissolve, etc (and couldn't all just be held up by the intransigence of a single man).
       
 (DIR) Post #2852227 by gamehawk@mastodon.social
       2019-01-10T23:32:37Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @keithzg @Canageek On paper the US government shouldn't be held up by the intransigence of a single man but yeah, here we are. I genuinely do *not* understand what is going on in the Republican Party right now.
       
 (DIR) Post #2852228 by keithzg@mastodon.club
       2019-01-11T02:32:05Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @gamehawk@CanageekThat's a reasonable concern, although in such circumstances the Prime Minister's Office actually often has, if anything, *more* power than the U.S. Executive Branch, due to the lack of a "checks and balances" meme in Canadian political structure and norms.
       
 (DIR) Post #2852229 by Canageek@cybre.space
       2019-01-11T02:43:22Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @keithzg @gamehawk True, but I thought they had less executive order power?Also less control over the military then the US President has
       
 (DIR) Post #2852389 by gamehawk@mastodon.social
       2019-01-11T02:52:18Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @Canageek @keithzg Yeah, the USAn tradition is to underuse the checks and balances, especially Congress, and boy, is it coming around to bite us here.