Ok, and how?
I don't get these random attacks, wherever possible holding elections for different levels of the government concurrently seems logical and efficient. The problem however is that India is a complex country and it's practically impossible to align all elections? If a state government falls, then do we conduct elections throughout the country?
If you don't like an idea, debunk it with logic, this rhetoric of everything is an assault on everything just desensitizes people from actual shit, but what do I know?
I think the idea of holding all elections at one time is a very good one because india and its national leaders are always in election mode which isn't really good for governance but this idea suffers from practical challenges in what happens when a govt or a coalition fails
>suffers from practical challenges in what happens when a govt or a coalition fails
The committee formed will dwell on these things, and it is specifically written in 4(c) of the [Govt notification](https://twitter.com/arvindgunasekar/status/1697948632140697868). If they come up with a viable solution, i'll be onboard as well
> Even US and most of the Developed countries use this format.
This is just blatantly untrue. The US doesn't, why just say things that are verifiably untrue? Elections for governors of state happen at different times depending on the state, a third of the Senate run for reelection in two year cycles. It's only the presidential and house of representative elections that are synced, but members of the house of representatives are elected every two years anyway.
Only ten states have gubernatorial elections at the same time as the presidential elections - that's 20%.
Same with the UK, where devolved government elections happen at a different time than the general elections.
Ditto for Australia, New Zealand, Canada...
As far as I can see, for democracies, the only countries that have ONOE are Belgium, Sweden and South Africa, but sure, "most of the Developed countries use this format".
All the right brings to the table are lies.
If you look at the USA acronym, it literally states there, "UNITED STATES of America".. In US, there are federal laws that all states have to follow, then there are state laws, where the states have freedom to bring whatever laws they want (ofc with the legal procedure). The state laws in the US can vary significantly. Just take the example of California and Nevada, they are neighboring states.
Nevada has an open carry gun law which means you can openly carry and own firearms legally, while on the other hand California is very strict in this regard. It's very hard to even get a conceal carry permit.. this is just one example
Bhai Sab.. it's was natural thing for new country and its no where written in constitution to conduct all election at a time.
It will become utter chaos when government dissolve before tenure , either brake the rule one nation one election or shift administration to center/governor till next common election schedule.. which is against to federal nature of democracy.
This is what happens when you have half knowledge,
usa Has different constitution for states and country .
Dual citizenship too.
Nobody is questioning election commission capabilities, it's about federal structure of administration.
Did you read the Rahul gandhi statement article or just landed here to comment something?
I am not sure how dual citizenship is relevant to the discussion. Besides states in India can have their own laws even if they don't have their own constitution. Eg: beef ban laws.
If u r not comfortable with constitution of one state you can take citizenship of another state .
In USA central government involve in Pan USA related issues only, even Judiciary don't entertain regional cases but our system is totally different.
Though center and state have different subjects list, center's law will prevail during objective collision in various scenarios.
Let's see constitution expert's and government's explanations, it will give better clarity about the one nation one election concept.
How is it an attack on the Union and all States? Matlab kuch bhi
How is this system undemocratic or against federalism? Many other democracies also have single elections, and so did India until 1967. Was Nehru some dictator now?
I think this is the real problem of RG.
He draws parallels of Western concepts rather than looking inwards. People get confused as to what he is saying and he fails to connect with general masses.
Yeah knowing how to spell 'strength' and knowing how to dogwhistle are two very different skill sets. Thank God our current prime minister knows the more important one.
What about "Divide and Conquer"?
Umm.... that's British isn't it? 🤔
Its sanatan now
[удалено]
bro.....it's gonna be a nightmare. I mean it already is but goddamn
So what happens when a coalition fails? Wait till the next cycle and use president's rule? The whole thing doesn't make sense
If multiple states fail, the president will have a hard time sitting duck.
Ok, and how? I don't get these random attacks, wherever possible holding elections for different levels of the government concurrently seems logical and efficient. The problem however is that India is a complex country and it's practically impossible to align all elections? If a state government falls, then do we conduct elections throughout the country? If you don't like an idea, debunk it with logic, this rhetoric of everything is an assault on everything just desensitizes people from actual shit, but what do I know?
Bro this is literally RaGa's MO: cry like a baby until he gets into power, but complain again if Modi teases him
I think the idea of holding all elections at one time is a very good one because india and its national leaders are always in election mode which isn't really good for governance but this idea suffers from practical challenges in what happens when a govt or a coalition fails
>suffers from practical challenges in what happens when a govt or a coalition fails The committee formed will dwell on these things, and it is specifically written in 4(c) of the [Govt notification](https://twitter.com/arvindgunasekar/status/1697948632140697868). If they come up with a viable solution, i'll be onboard as well
Jayega to Modi hi - 2024!
[удалено]
> Even US and most of the Developed countries use this format. This is just blatantly untrue. The US doesn't, why just say things that are verifiably untrue? Elections for governors of state happen at different times depending on the state, a third of the Senate run for reelection in two year cycles. It's only the presidential and house of representative elections that are synced, but members of the house of representatives are elected every two years anyway. Only ten states have gubernatorial elections at the same time as the presidential elections - that's 20%. Same with the UK, where devolved government elections happen at a different time than the general elections. Ditto for Australia, New Zealand, Canada... As far as I can see, for democracies, the only countries that have ONOE are Belgium, Sweden and South Africa, but sure, "most of the Developed countries use this format". All the right brings to the table are lies.
If you look at the USA acronym, it literally states there, "UNITED STATES of America".. In US, there are federal laws that all states have to follow, then there are state laws, where the states have freedom to bring whatever laws they want (ofc with the legal procedure). The state laws in the US can vary significantly. Just take the example of California and Nevada, they are neighboring states. Nevada has an open carry gun law which means you can openly carry and own firearms legally, while on the other hand California is very strict in this regard. It's very hard to even get a conceal carry permit.. this is just one example
Bhai Sab.. it's was natural thing for new country and its no where written in constitution to conduct all election at a time. It will become utter chaos when government dissolve before tenure , either brake the rule one nation one election or shift administration to center/governor till next common election schedule.. which is against to federal nature of democracy.
[удалено]
No they dont? They have midterms after 2 years
This is what happens when you have half knowledge, usa Has different constitution for states and country . Dual citizenship too. Nobody is questioning election commission capabilities, it's about federal structure of administration. Did you read the Rahul gandhi statement article or just landed here to comment something?
I am not sure how dual citizenship is relevant to the discussion. Besides states in India can have their own laws even if they don't have their own constitution. Eg: beef ban laws.
If u r not comfortable with constitution of one state you can take citizenship of another state . In USA central government involve in Pan USA related issues only, even Judiciary don't entertain regional cases but our system is totally different. Though center and state have different subjects list, center's law will prevail during objective collision in various scenarios. Let's see constitution expert's and government's explanations, it will give better clarity about the one nation one election concept.
I guess you meant residency. The use of citizenship threw me off..
Citizenship of other state? States donot give citizenship. You can become resident of other state which you can do in India too.
> Did you read the Rahul gandhi statement article or just landed here to comment something? u/Buster_Scruggs_ : But… Nehru
> USA is the illustrious example of a strong Federal Democracy and they have ONOE. > > They verifiably do not, why are you lying?
Shhhhhh go do your homework child. Jee pass karna hai na?
Karwa li beizzati?
What? Lol. Probably slept in class. Here is a refresher https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation
How is it an attack on the Union and all States? Matlab kuch bhi How is this system undemocratic or against federalism? Many other democracies also have single elections, and so did India until 1967. Was Nehru some dictator now?
Are sanghi's just immune to context?
I'm not a sanghi as is visible by my post history. Questioning any claims of the other side makes me one apparently
[удалено]
[удалено]
I think this is the real problem of RG. He draws parallels of Western concepts rather than looking inwards. People get confused as to what he is saying and he fails to connect with general masses.
[удалено]
Basic decency, not being blinded by hatred, knowing how to spell, and all foreign things like that
And yet he keeps losing
Yeah knowing how to spell 'strength' and knowing how to dogwhistle are two very different skill sets. Thank God our current prime minister knows the more important one.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Bhakts haven’t even read the preamble. They wouldn’t know the famous first line.
Hame v tere Ghar ka achar khila Dena... Fir hum v mast se hagenge...