Do you think people should have the right to vote for their political leaders?

hi, I believed that it would be better if everyone is given the right to choose their own political leader. That's why I would choose the first one. about advantages and disadvantages, I think the advantage would be having equal human or citizen rights. The disadvantage is, if a particular ethnic has relative large numbers of people, other ethnics wouldn't stand a chance to have their choice selected. Of course. Another disadvantages of both systems would be the possibility of choosing the wrong leader. It is common when he or she wanted to be selected, many campaigns and programmes would be held so as to convince the people that they are the right one to be the leader, they will take care of everyone's rights and needs. At times, they don't walk the talk.

I believe the United States has the best form of government, a republic. No one entity has total control, we all have to answer to the other. The people vote for their political leaders, but unlike a democracy, there is no mob rule because our government is based on the law of our Constitution.

because of the concept of democracy which is the rule of the majority, people vote directly their political leaders. i think it is wise and correct to have this kind of system in place. everyone should have the right to vote, but no one will have to be compelled to vote. it is a free exercise of that right. we are still learning from the essence of this kind of political exercise.

As a citizen we have the right to vote for our chosen political candidate. But for me four elections passed by already I wasn't able to vote,I have my personal reason not to exercise my right and they can't force me.

It's like the selection of two route.One leads to the right direction and the other to the wrong.But each has both joy and problems along with it.Which one do you prefer?

Which kind of family do you like,one where only your parents' opinions are right or where every member is equal and has the right to devote his or her opinions to the decision-making process?What's more,a country is not a family,for the ruling class cannot be anyone's parents but their own children's.So why should they take responsibility for others without their own families?This is human nature.I mean that if the leader is not voted by you,that is,his empowerment has nothing to do with you,he's not obliged to take responsibility for you.Whether you support him or not matters nothing.Out of human nature,what he's likely to do is mind the stance of those who empower his out of the need of promotion in his career,and to mind the well-being of his own children out of human nature.The former one can lead to his action not on behalf of the ordinary people but on those more powerful who often lack no wealth and have protection of themselves from disasters,and the latter one often lead to corruption whose damage to the whole nation will become more and more serious.And because his deposition doesn't depend on others but his leaders,what he should do is turn to his leaders for help if having trouble with his corruption.Thus,corrution is an inherent disease within a regime where people have no say in the selection of leaders.And more often than not,in such a case,the centralization of power into some people will lead to double-standard practices in the legal system--just imagine what will result from the fact that the law can be manipulated!Of course,the system where ordinary people can be allowed to vote does not necessary have its problems.For example,rows and even violence related to election issues.In my opinion,in such regimes,some problems should be noticed.First,be avoided the manipulation of popular trends which may be directed to fascism.Second,the opinions of the majority should not trample on the human rights of the minority.The disagreements?--That's too natural because we are human.Of course,and also some others.Thank you for discussion here.If any grammartical mistakes in my writing which make confusion,thank you for informing me.

I think people should have the right to vote and they should have the responsibility to do it and thus be encouraged to do so, but not have voting be required. I think that if a country does not give its people the right to elect the political leaders of their choosing, their is no true freedom. And, at least in the culture in which I was raised, freedom and liberty are extremely valuable to any society. Just my two cents, I suppose.

hi, for me,my opinion is yes,that citizens really have the right to vote for their political leaders,a freedom to choose who will be the their wanted leaders,and because i am in a democratic country that all citizen have the rights to choose.

Political leaders are not "leaders" so much as they are "representatives" of the people. People choose them because the people feel they 'represent' and thus make the same choice the people themselves would make in the position.