What was the Premortem succession crisis?
491124
Check out this site...way too much and hard to explain it. But if you browse thru this site it's all there. hope this helps you out...good luck!
854986
Heir Apparent Is first in line to succession and can't be replaced by the birth of someone else. Heir Presumptive Is a person set to inherit a position but can loose it do to a birth of an heir apparent or someone else with more right to the position.
519953
hmmm, \n\ndemocratic.  \n\n:)
161082
He wasn't reelected he was appointed the first time. I have no idea what 51% of the people were thinking, oh I know they wasn't thinking, just marched right in and pulled a lever and it happened to be his. I really think he cheated in Ohio and maybe a coulple more states.
721340
If Blair keeps his promise to retire before the next election, then his successor will come from the Labour Party - most people expect Gordon Brown. Do you believe that New Labour is the Party that will solve the pensions crisis and save the NHS? Or the Tories? - which is the only other likely possibility.\n\nI agree that politicians would be more responsive to electors with a suitable proportional representation system, but only if the electors are allowed to choose between individual candidates. The disgusting systems for Europe, Scotland and Wales, with their party lists, go the other way and make politicans LESS accountable. While you are at it, postal voting on request for all undermines the secret ballot and lets in posibilities for pressurising individuals to vote for vested interests.\n\n\nI am not sure that pensions and the NHS will be the biggest issues at the next election. There is a saying "It's the economy, stupid". The pensions crisis is only one of a number of black clouds on the economic horizon, both for the United Kingdom and the Western world generally.
596476
A puppet, before a rebellion or a coup.
38768
it is not really clear.  the egyptian parliament nominates a single candidate, who is then confirmed by a referendum vote (which is typically a massively-rigged election).  egypt has been moving to democratize lately, but it looks to be a slow process and mubarak will likely not let much power slip from his hands.\n\nthe economist seems to think that mubarak has been preparing his son, Galal Mubarak, to take over before he dies or steps down.  however this has been met with public disapproval and it is not really certain just who would take over.  if mubarak were to suddenly die, it would probably be a time of crisis in egypt that could either lead to a more democratic society or possibly civil war.
406400
The term Glorious Revolution refers to the generally popular overthrow of James II of England in 1688 by a conspiracy between some Parliamentarians and the Dutch stadtholder William III of Orange-Nassau. The revolution was the last successful invasion of England. It is sometimes referred to as the Bloodless Revolution but this name is a misnomer as there was much fighting with loss of life in Ireland and, to a lesser degree, in Scotland. Some modern historians, alternatively, prefer the more neutral Revolution of 1688.\n\nLegacy:\nThe Glorious Revolution was one of the most important events in the long evolution of powers possessed by Parliament and by the Crown in England. With the passage of the Bill of Rights, it stamped out any final possibility of a Catholic monarchy, and ended moves towards monarchical absolutism in the British Isles by circumscribing the monarch's powers. The King's powers were greatly restricted; he could no longer suspend laws, levy taxes, or maintain a standing army during peacetime without Parliament's permission. Since 1689, England, and later the United Kingdom, has been governed under a system of constitutional monarchy, which has been uninterrupted. Since then, Parliament has gained more and more power, and the Crown has progressively lost it.\n\nThe success of the revolution came three years after the failure of the Monmouth Rebellion to overthrow the king.\n\nThe Williamite victory in Ireland is still commemorated by the Orange Order for preserving British and Protestant dominance in the country.\n\nFor more see:\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_Revolution\n\nPS \n(For the other ansewer(s) )\nThere was bloodshed.\n\nSee \n"It is sometimes referred to as the Bloodless Revolution but this name is a misnomer as there was much fighting with loss of life in Ireland and, to a lesser degree, in Scotland."
350671
If the Prime Minister were assasinated, there wouldn't be much of a constitutional problem.  The Labour Party would still have a working majority in the House of Commons.  The Deputy Prime Minister (John Prescott) would probably act as Prime Minister while the Labour Party elected a new leader.  The new leader would then become the Prime Minister. \n\nAs for the royal family, there is a long line of succession.  Even if the whole of the Queen's immediate family were assasinated, there would be someone left who was "next in line".
128214
President or Precedent???
797078
Andrew...the line of succession goes through all the queen's sons and their children (either sex) before her daughter...so even if Charles and his 2 boys were lost then Anne would have to wait for Andrew and his daughters (and any children they might have) and then Edward and his daughter and any other children she might have.\nSo basically, it only pays to be a princess royal if you're an only child!
36463
In general, if there are no heirs, there will most likely be an Executor who has control.  Locating the probate records is a good start.  However, this can become a rather complex subject with a number of possibilities.  An excellent article is at:\n\nhttp://copylaw.com/new_articles/copyterm.html\n\nThe interesting question would be to find out (for a specific copyright) when (or even if) the renewal of copyright was exercised from which period of copyright and if not who can exercise such an option.   \n I realize that this doesn't answer your question in a direct manner, but it points a way to answer the question as you find the various elements applicable to the situation.
1122658
The bigger question: What happened to France.
1005218
The Shah was installed into power by the US.  \n\n"President Carter inherited an impossible situation -- and he and his advisers made the worst of it." Carter seemed to have a hard time deciding whether to heed the advice of his aggressive national security advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, who wanted to encourage the Shah to brutally suppress the revolution, or that of his more cautious State Department, which suggested Carter reach out to opposition elements in order to smooth the transition to a new government. In the end he did neither, and suffered the consequences.\n\nHere's a full description of what happened.  \n\nhttp://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/carter/peopleevents/e_hostage.html
314755
i believe the 'renassance', as you call it, which by the way is more appropriately spelled as Renaissance, was a sort of reawakening (around the 15th-16th century) of the (please correct me if i'm wrong) European people in terms of once again venturing out onto the world in search of cultural, artistic and intellectual knowledge. This was because the period before the Renaissance was actually the time when the Byzantine Empire(it was the capital of Rome)fell from power (because of the Turks), thus throwing Europe and all its scholars into a state of frenzy to survive because of the nature of the brutish and ruthless overthrowers, giving them rarely the time to think about anything less than living as far as tomorrow, much less...well, THINKING at all. But sometime after that, I believe a string of events I really cannot come to mind right now, occured, leading to the said era. By the way, Renaissance aactually means 'rebirth' in Italian, a very befitting name if i may say so. Hope I helped. :)
430635
Revolutions usually have some kind of organized political power behind them (a party or an organized group of people with a political agenda). Events in France can affect the results of elections next year, but I believe there will be no disruption in a democratic process
352434
This is why there's a line of succession.  The old ruler might not have had children or brothers or sisters - but I guarantee if you go far enough back on his or her family tree there will be cousins somewhere.\n\nThis has actually happened in real life before.  When Queen Anne died childless, Great Britain had to go to Germany to find the nearest (Protestant) successor.  A member of Queen Anne's family had married in to that family years before.  The House of Stuart died with her and King George I became the the first member of the Royal House of Hanover.\n\nSometimes the actual relation of the old king or queen to their successor is miniscule.  When Henry VII became king, the only blood basis he could give for the claim was that his mother was the great-great granddaughter of King Edward III, a hundred years earlier.