CL wrote:
> Declan Murphy wrote:
> 
>> I can't see any reason why it couldn't be done within 48 hours of the
>> election, the way it is in every other developed country with a
>> democratic system. The only problem might be the sheer number of
>> appointees the US system seems to involve.
> 
> It smells too much like a coup d'etat or royal succession.  Besides, as 
> a representative democracy, there has to be time for the House and 
> Senate races to be settled.  My own "home" state has still not declared 
> the winner of the US Senate seat contest, yet.  The incumbent 
> excrescence, Norm "Smarmy Normy" Coleman, seems to be leading by less 
> than one hundred votes out of three million cast.

Here in Oz it takes weeks for the final results to be known, as
postal votes trickle in, recounts are done, etc. However the
general outcome is usually known within a couple of hours, and
is usually pretty firm within 48 hours - firm enough for a
change of government to start. We usually see a new cabinet
sworn in about a week after an election when the government
changes. From what I see of parliamentary systems around the
world, it's much the same all over*. The US with its couple of
months of lame-duckdom is the odd one out.

(* - an exception in Oz is the Senate, which has fixed terms. Our
last federal election was in November 2007, but new senators
didn't join the Senate until July 2008.  I think it's stupid.
I'd prefer their terms to be aligned with the lower house.)

-- 
Jim Breen        http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/
Clayton School of Information Technology,
Monash University, VIC 3800, Australia
ジム・ブリーン@モナシュ大学