# John McCain's confusion -- is he really mentally fit? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 13, 2008, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-mccains-confusion-is-he-really-mentally-fit/452798 "2008-06-13T13:07:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2008, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-mccains-confusion-is-he-really-mentally-fit/452798/81 "2008-06-17T21:08:08Z")
I guess that my philosophy is that the purpose of a democracy is to appoint the best decision maker available to the job of making decisions. And then letting him make decisions. Otherwise what’s the point of picking out the best decision maker available? If the majority opinion of the crowd says one thing and the best decision maker in that crowd says something different, then the majority is probably wrong and the BDM is probably right - that’s the whole point of him being the BDM. And we should be making the best decision not the most popular one - we shouldn’t listen to the majority when the majority is wrong. ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2008, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-mccains-confusion-is-he-really-mentally-fit/452798/82 "2008-06-18T15:25:10Z")
[QUOTE=Little Nemo] I guess that my philosophy is that the purpose of a democracy is to appoint the best decision maker available to the job of making decisions. And then letting him make decisions. Otherwise what’s the point of picking out the best decision maker available? [/quote] The voters don’t get asked (by the legislatures) their opinions on each and every piece of legislation worked on. I thought I made it clear that I fully understand that, if, in each and every case of impending legislation, the representitives had to go back and poll the voters that need to be hashed out, progress would be exceedingly slow, and would be impractical in the long run. Here’s the rub: I don’t get involved (nor do I expect to need to be involved) in routine matters, such as budget debates, or hashing out mandated minimum standards for fertilizers, etc. In this arena, I trust our representitives to be able to conduct their buisness with little or no imput from the constituents. It’s the non-routine stuff that we notice in the news (It’s in the news _because_ the debates are on unique, once-in-a-while stuff.), stuff that the public becomes aware of and has time to voice their opinions, that the representitives should be paying attention to the constituents. Stuff like Same Sex Marriage, Drivers Licences for Illegals, Voter ID’s, Oil drilling in ANWAR, for example. > [@little nemo](#): > > If the majority opinion of the crowd says one thing and the best decision maker in that crowd says something different, then the majority is probably wrong and the BDM is probably right - that’s the whole point of him being the BDM. You make it sound like we are deciding on hard science here. As if there is only one “right answer”. If all political issues dealt with such black-and-white questions/answers only, I might agree with you. But there is a ton of subjective stuff that our society deals with that needs to get debated as well. In these cases, the “BDM” is on a playing field with shifting goal posts. That “BDM”'s opinion is not necessarily better than mine, IMO. > [@](#): > > And we should be making the best decision not the most popular one - we shouldn’t listen to the majority when the majority is wrong. I came up with three hypotheticals questions where I laid out an issue which is a little more subjective, and where a politician could conceivably “trump the majority” because that politician felt that he/she believed that their answer was the “right one”, while the public was wrong. (Amnesty, Same Sex Marriage, Junk Food Ban.) You ignored two (and agreed with me with the junk food example). Why is that? (I am not implying any negative unlterior motives here. I just think that my examples show that not all decisions by our representitives are cut-and-dried right-and-wrong here.) > [@Little Nemo](#): > > I guess that my philosophy is that the purpose of a democracy is to appoint the best decision maker available to the job of making decisions. In practical terms, this ends up manifesting as the politicians doing what they want, no matter what. If the public happens to agree, great. If not, tough titties. You make it sound like we are electing someone to a “noblility caste” position. If you think the voters only role is to appoint the political leaders, and then have effectively _no_ voice in any of the decision making until the next election cycle, how is that a democracy? It sounds like a Constitutional Oligarchy. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2008, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-mccains-confusion-is-he-really-mentally-fit/452798/83 "2008-06-18T17:28:46Z")
> [@](#): > > In practical terms, this ends up manifesting as the politicians doing what they want, no matter what. If the public happens to agree, great. If not, tough titties. You make it sound like we are electing someone to a “noblility caste” position. If you think the voters only role is to appoint the political leaders, and then have effectively no voice in any of the decision making until the next election cycle, how is that a democracy? It sounds like a Constitutional Oligarchy. It’s a democracy because we decide who gets the job (and continuing elections mean we decide if they keep the job). But once we’ve decided who gets the job, we should let them do it. It’s not a matter of nobility - it’s a matter of expertise. You hire the best doctor for medical problems. You hire the best plumber for plumbing problems. And you hire the best politician for political problems. And once you’ve hired them, you let them work. What’s the point of getting an expert opinion on an issue if you’re going to require it to be vetted by the approval of non-experts? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2008, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-mccains-confusion-is-he-really-mentally-fit/452798/84 "2008-06-18T18:01:41Z")
[QUOTE=Little Nemo] It’s a democracy because we decide who gets the job (and continuing elections mean we decide if they keep the job). But once we’ve decided who gets the job, we should let them do it. It’s not a matter of nobility - it’s a matter of expertise. You hire the best doctor for medical problems. You hire the best plumber for plumbing problems. And you hire the best politician for political problems. And once you’ve hired them, you let them work. What’s the point of getting an expert opinion on an issue if you’re going to require it to be vetted by the approval of non-experts? [/QUOTE] I assume you would include Bush and the invasion of Iraq in the above. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2008, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-mccains-confusion-is-he-really-mentally-fit/452798/85 "2008-06-18T21:01:54Z")
[QUOTE=Little Nemo] It’s a democracy because we decide who gets the job (and continuing elections mean we decide if they keep the job). But once we’ve decided who gets the job, we should let them do it. It’s not a matter of nobility - it’s a matter of expertise. You hire the best doctor for medical problems. You hire the best plumber for plumbing problems. And you hire the best politician for political problems. And once you’ve hired them, you let them work. What’s the point of getting an expert opinion on an issue if you’re going to require it to be vetted by the approval of non-experts? [/QUOTE] You keep asking this of me. (Posts 79, 81, 83.) I keep trying to explain why I don’t “vote and trust” for the next 4-6 years. (Like a “fire and forget missile” with my vote.) Am I that bad at explaining my views? 😕 If we are just supposed to “vote and trust”, how could we _ever_ justify complaining about what a politician does? (This ignores the fact that politicians are typically NOT experts on most of the issues that they have to legislate on. They themselves rely on experts _that they themselves have to come to trust_. This also ignores the fact that the politician may be just plain wrong. Human, after all…) What if that politician decides “What’s good for me is good for America.”, enriches himself and his friends with lucrative government contracts, appoints cronies to government jobs, etc. Should I then “Shut up and suck up”, because that politician is the “expert I hired”? One of the ways the public ensures itself that the politician is working for the public good is when he/she legislates in concert with their desires and views. When that politician goes against the majority, he/she then has to explain his/her actions to the voters, to reassure them he/she is not corrupt. This is the “fighting ignorance” part of his/her job. I think this back-and-forth interaction between the voters and their representitives is an important safety feature in our system (versus corruption among other things). It’s not perfect (especially when the voting populace gets complacent or apathetic), I’ll grant you that. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2008, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-mccains-confusion-is-he-really-mentally-fit/452798/86 "2008-06-19T23:39:56Z")
[QUOTE=Squink] ISTM that McCain’s gift for misspeaking is even more pronounced than our current president’s. One must draw a line somewhere. Where is it? [/QUOTE] That’s a horribly bigoted statement! The greatest President we ever had was the even more ancient Ronald Reagan! Oh, sure, the libruls called him “dotard,” “space cadet,” & “senile,” but that’s experience, that’s _gravitas,_ right there! Respect your elders, you young– :breaks up laughing: I’m sorry, I can’t say that with a straight face. You’re right, of course. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2008, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-mccains-confusion-is-he-really-mentally-fit/452798/87 "2008-06-20T21:58:14Z")
> [@](#): > > Am I that bad at explaining my views? I guess we’re going to have to disagree on this issue. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-mccains-confusion-is-he-really-mentally-fit/452798.md?page=4)