Concerning the "Mandate" Dispute
A quick thought concerning the dispute over whether or not President Bush's 62 million votes constitute a "mandate."
There are two schools of thought here. One side says that 62 million is a rather high number, and 51% is considerable given both the polarized electorate and the all-out offensive waged against Bush leading up to the 2004 elections. The other says that 51% is still a slim majority, and that a President who has won such a narrow victory ought to move a bit towards the center to reflect that.
Two things, to me, have gone largely unsaid in response to the "mandate" issue:- First, the idea that a President should adjust his or her policies to reflect their margin of victory is absurd on its face. If they think something needs to be done, they ought to do it. It's downright unprincipled to temper policies that you think beneficial to the country to match your vote total.
- Second, whether or not Bush has received a genuine "mandate," it's clear that the Republican party as a whole has. They controlled all three branches of government heading into the 2004 elections, and not only held the Presidency, but gained in both branches of Congress, as well. Whether or not the electorate has given Bush the thumbs-up, it's undeniable that they've done so for the Republican party as a whole.
If the American people wanted Bush to moderate his political ambitions, they'd have elected a more evenly split Congress to keep him in check. But the voters have made their choice, and less than 5 months later, we're already seeing indications that they may have chosen wisely.
» March 15th, 2005
|
|
Calendar
More Entries
Blogroll
Instapundit
Andrew Sullivan
Tom Maguire
Decision '08
Patrick O'Keefe
Categories
Blogging
Democrats
Economy
Elections '04
Elections '06
Elections '08
Entertainment
George W. Bush
Iraq
Media
Miscellaneous
Republicans
Social Security
Supreme Court
Technology
War on Terror
Email Me
|
