WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!!!
Is he the President (one of three branches of our government), or is he a dictator?
The only way what you state gets accomplished is if he were a dictator, and had no resistence to his mandate(s). Ergo, I will ask the question again: Are you upset at Jim Jeffords?
IN the US it takes 3 things. A president has to have a majority in the house. Bills in the house can pass with control and a simple majority of the votes. A President has to have 60 votes in the Senate. 51 out of 100 is not enough. It takes 60 votes to break a fillibuster. 41 votes can block a president in the Senate. Nothing passes that 41 Senators do not want passed. Said another way anything that 60 senators want will pass the senate. 60 senators can bring anything to the floor for a vote. Party control is not nearly as important as 60 votes. A party can have 55 members in the senate and get absoluely nothing passed if the other 45 are against them in all matters.
In the 20th century only FDR and LBJ had that kind of control. And as you look back they are the ones that changed things. It was teh new deal and Great Society that took this nation left. Everyone else on the right or left were just holding actions. Clinton could not move to the left and Reagan could not move to the right. It was with less than 60 votes a checkmate for both sides.
Dubya is the only Republcan president that has a chance to change things for the right. But nothing will change unless he gets 60 votes in the senate.To get 60 votes takes suport of about 60 percent of the voting population. When the votes are tied as they were in 2000 you get a tied senate.
But to get that 60 percent Bush must make the election about him and he must maintain better than 60 percent job approval rating. Hisorically what happens is the Democrats and Republicans fight. The squishy center does not like fights. The media blames the Republicans for the fight and the squishy center votes for the Democrats.
You win the center by playing the Democrats as the Aggressors out to do harm, and the Republicans as people trying to solve problems by working together. Democrats are well aware of what is at stake. So if they can start a fight and get it going, they win. If Republicans can stay above fighting and continue to appear as those just trying to work together to solve problems they just might win big enough to change things.
Most right wing people want to brawl. Democrats know that, so they try to start brawls. Once the brawl is started the media alays blames the brawl on the Republicans and the squishy middle votes left again. Democrats win when there are brawls even if they lose the brawl they win the election. And people wonder why Daschle is aggressive and nasty...
There is never a problem getting folks who agree with you to vote for you. But sadly there are never enough of those people to elect anyone. Elections are won by getting folks that disagree with you to vote for you.
It is a trick that the right has never mastered. It is why they almost never win.
Duby is trying to make a difference. Will the Right be able to stop Dubya before he achieves victory? You can count on them giving it their best shot.
Dubya isn't a dictator but he does have the constitutional to veto. He also has the constitutional authority not to propose more government programs. BTW, what does "not being a dictator" have to do with Dubya's recent initiatives to *increase* the size of government. In fact, I thought that a dictator (your word) would like such big government initiatives.