Replies

"Maybe their constituencies feel this way."

A representative walks a fine line...their job is not merely to reflect the majority views of their constituents on every issue...that in effect would make us a pure democracy. They are notionally elected to exercise their judgment on behalf of their constituents...Many times the popular will and the greater good will coincide, but there are times when the legislator has to take a stand, and this was one of them.

If the constituency is split 50-50, I'd agree. If the constituency is split 55-45, I'd still agree. If the constituency is heavily lopsided in one direction, I think as a practical and moral matter, he has to represent that view.

Some Freepers have a problem accepting this because of our disdain for Clinton governing by polls. That's one extreme that should be avoided. The other end is how Dubya conducted himself, where not only didn't he govern by polls, he also saw very little need and exhibited very little desire to listen to the electorate, or try and convince them he was right.

Our politicians are leaders, not rulers. The result of Dubya's posture is that he cultivated an image of an out-of-touch leader that at this point I don't think he can shake. He alienated more people than not, and they just don't trust him. And the bad guys know that the american public just won't trust him with another military misadventure.

Dubya doesn't have the credibility, nor moral authority at this point, to do anything about Iran, for example. the Iranians know it. Everyone knows it. Dubya's leadership style has made him very weak, and a big reason for that is his tin ear to the opinions of those he is sworn to lead.