I found this bit interesting:
Similarly, in 1933, Franklin Delano Roosevelt stood on the sidelines for four months, as the United States sunk into the Great Depression. Indeed, it was during that period, the lame duck months of Herbert Hoover's term, that the 20th Amendment was ratified.
We have just had what seems like a long lame duck period, during which the world has been slammed with what could be another Great Depression. And as with previous presidents, again we've been watching from Australia; this time to see our former PM get presented with a very high honour, by George W Bush (we presume for our ex-PM's unswerving support in the face of international disapproval).
We have no official lame duck period, although we had one to a certain extent in 2006/7, because our incumbent leaders get a great deal of say in when elections can be held. They can't hold on to leadership for more than three years without calling another election. But if they keep winning elections there is no maximum number of terms. (Our former PM was the 2nd-longest serving PM in Australia. The record for the longest time in office was for Robert Menzies, who was PM for 23 years.) However they can choose to call an election (lower house, aka House of Representatives, the one that REALLY determines which party is in power) AT ANY TIME (although as the decision has to be ratified by our Governor General, it is unlikely in the first year of office).
If a government is doing well, they may choose to call an early election while their popularity is high. Or they may gamble on still being popular at the end of their term and wait to call an election then. But a government that is increasingly unpopular (as our previous government was) can choose to wait til the absolutely last minute of their term, to wring out the last drops of public support and hope for a miracle.
Our former PM had survived a couple of times before, by just such a miracle - in times of crisis, countries tend to not change political leaders. But this time he had at last run out of steam. We all knew he was almost certainly going to get voted out, with a resounding defeat (in the end, he not only lost the election, he even lost his own electorate - almost unheard of for a sitting PM to be voted out of his seat; it's happened only once before). But he stalled on calling an election. And stalled. Everyone knew the date of the last day on which he could call an election, and yes - he waited until then. He did everything he could in the previous YEAR to try and boost the popularity of his party but nothing worked, or it backfired badly. I suspect it wouldn't have mattered how good he was, people were bored with him, fed up and wanting change, ANY change. And he was good - or he wouldn't have been able to hold on to power for so long.
The problem for us was, everybody knew that he was most unlikely to win the next election. But he still had so much control of the government, that he used every chance he could to get through every law that he could, all the unpopular stuff, all the stuff that would nobble the next government. Our Workplace Relations laws for example, were brought in by what Australia at the time considered to be its own "lame duck" government even though they had not yet lost the election. It's taken our new government the next 12 months to even begin to unravel the mess that was made of our employment laws. Rights that had been fought for for decades or more, were wiped away with the stroke of a pen, and are being fought for all over again. Strange holes have shown up in these laws, where a person can be sacked from a job with no reason given, then re-hired at half the pay and with all previous conditions removed.
Having just lived through our own long lame duck period, and having watched US news a great deal in the run-up to your election and since, I'm wondering if some time soon, the lame duck period will be shortened again?
I'll let husband know about the inauguration date having been the same, for all our lives. We never really noticed it before, probably because this is the first time we've had such a historic appointment. Certainly it's the first time Australian media were giving it such blanket coverage!
I've been trying to run my mind back past previous inaugurations I can remember. We did get some coverage on our news, of the past few Presidents. I remember Reagan's, I remember George W, I remember Carter's and Clinton's, all as covered on our evening news. But nothing like the fanfare we've seen this time.
Thanks for informing this weary little colonial from Down Under, of these events of great import. May we all be spared the excesses of lame ducks in the future!
To the moderators - I tried really hard to avoid being political in this post. Much of what I have stated is not merely opinion, it is enshrined in the regular opinion polls which were updated on an almost daily basis, for the 18 months we waited to change our government. We finally did the deed in December 2007. It is just fascinating to compare how it works in Australia, with how it works in the US, and how eventually it all comes round to influence everything on a broader scale.
Marg