Tony Snow on the President’s expected plan to increase troops in Iraq. I don’t get it. I’m sure this is amazingly naive, but why doesn’t public opinion count in a democracy?
Because once they have the power, you can just fuck off.
You’d think he’d at least take into account the opinions of the experts who wrote the Iraq War Study, but he’s too arrogant to let that happen, either. We’re fucked.
Certainly there are times when public opinion is not the best guide to policy: remember, public opinion at the time was that we needed to go into Iraq to smash Saddam and stop his weapons of mass destruction.
However, a leader needs to take public opinion (and the opinions of others) into account. The problem with Bush is that he makes up his mind and never deviates, even if things are going badly.
Richard Cohen recently pointed out that, back in 2000, Bush was talking about the death penalty and called it a deterrent. Cohen pointed out that there was no evidence that it was a deterrent, and Bush’s reply was (paraphrased), “You are right. But there’s no evidence that it’s not a deterrent, either.” Bush always wants his opponents to prove a negative (and he’s not going to accept any proof).
Essentially, Bush’s philosophy is “I made up my mind; I’m always right; so do as I say.”
Because it’s not a democracy, it’s a republic.
Yeah, what RealityChuck said. I am no fan of the Bush man, but we are technically a Republic not a democracy, and public opinion can often be wrong, and if a leader goes by what the majority of people want all the time, it would be chaos.
Sometimes such a decision is very bad (and quite often in Bush’s case), but I for one don’t wish to see what would happen if our leaders always did what the majority of people wanted. There are many more ignorant people than informed.
That public opinion came from the government’s insistence we needed to go into Iraq to smash Saddam and get his WMDs.
Whereas, if this were a Democracy instead of a Republic, it would then not be chaotic for the leader to go by what the majority wants. The fact that we’re a Republic obviously explains why we do it the way we do it.
Public opinion changes quickly and is easily influenced by those with power. If all we had was a democracy in which the most people thought was policy and fact, we would probably have had several nuclear wars, Muslims would be kicked out of the country, Slavery would probably not have been ended, and many other GOOD things that have happened wouldn’t have, just because 51% of the population wanted it to remain the same.
Mob rule is no reliable form of government. Especially when Mobs are easily convinced of things and turn into… well bigger mobs bent of violence.
gigi is apparently unaware of how American government works. There is an “accountability moment” once every four years. If the President can lie, sleaze, or manipulate his way to a razor-thin margin of victory, he then gets to do whatever he wishes.
This is called democracy.
I agree that Americans are woefully misinformed, and everytime I hear “democracy” I just want to cringe, since it is generally used, ironically enough, in a positive sense, so it’s clear that perhaps the user doesn’t have a good understanding of the term. Here’s a good working definition:
democracy: “A government of the masses. Authority derived through mass meeting
or any form of ‘direct’ expression. Results in mobocracy. Attitude toward
property is communistic, negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that
the will of the majority shall regulate, whether based upon deliberation
or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without retraint or
consequences. Results in demagoguery, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy.”
Right, and since he doesn’t have to worry about re-election this time, he can do anything. Am I learning?
So what is this “democracy” the United States is supposed to be spreading in Iraq? A republic?
I believe I have heard the term “Representative Democracy” used for the United States, although in the ol’ Pledge of Allegiance we say, “and to the Republic…”
He doesn’t - but he is associated with the Republican party, and depends on the Republicans in Congress for much of his power, and the Republicans in Congress (as was made abundantly clear recently) do have to worry about re-election.
Merriam-Webster: Democracy
Are those claiming that the USA is not a democracy using a different dictionary? Or for some reason excluding sense (1b)?
The government of the people, by the people and for the people has perished from the earth.
Nah, I usually say “True Democracy,” which is to me is easier and less confusing than saying “Definition 1 in XX dictionary.”
We are a Republic, which is a form of democracy, but saying a mackerel and a salmon are the same just because they qualify for the definition of fish is just as wrong as saying that the U.S is a democracy just because it fits under the second definition.
I understand it’s also known as a “mandate”.
America is a republic through representative democracy. (With a federal structure and a liberal mindset.) And absolutely, the representatives chosen through democratic processes to run the republic ought to listen to the people they represent. But I’m about to digress into GD territory here…
Hell, he won’t let policy be influenced by little things like facts, common sense or rational thought. Why would he be bothered by a little thing like public opinion.