Do You Believe That Any President Needs to Check With the American Voters.. . . . Before Making Decisions ?

Question

Or
Do you believe that we elect LEADERS to LEAD . . . ... . and not to rely on every opinion on the street ?

If you chose the first one.. . . . please explain how the people are qualified to have an opinion EQUAL to someone who has more information.. . . . .. . alot more !!!!

Thanks Jesus . I can't stand it when a user doesn't know how to use the word 'too' . Baffles me how so many struggle with a 3 letter word . I'm not bad, but I do make mistakes . Thanks again !!

Answer 1

We elect leaders to lead.
The president has advisors who have experience and access to information that the public is not privy to and should not be privy to.

I couldn't respect someone who was swayed by popularity polls, and who pandered to those polls.

Answer 2

Representative democracy means the leaders do not have to check with citizens before making decisions, but they are expected to act on behalf of those they lead. If they care about holding office, they should be aware of what the people want while bearing in mind that the average American is rather uneducated on current affairs, as most only know what the mainstream media reports.

The purpose of an election is to enable the voters to say whether or not they feel a politician is acting on behalf of the citizen, and whether they want that politician's continued leadership or someone new.

Answer 3

Two sides to every coin and this one as well. Yes, our leaders SHOULD represent the majority. No, they don't always do that.

Most Americans allow their thinking to be dictated by what they are told. Joseph Stalin said tell a lie long enough and soon enough most people will believe it. The truth is that it's not the politicians who are leaders.

They are merely puppets (the vast majority of them anyhow) for the owners of the Federal Reserve. It is the owners of the Federal Reserve who are the real leaders in the United States of America and globally. Many people gullibly fall into the trap of what those owners want us to believe.

If you've never heard any of this before it's because the owners of the Federal Reserve also own, by controlling the majority stock, many other corporations including much of mainstream media to include: CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, network radio and 1,000's of newspapers, magazines and websites. They want you to know what they want you to know and they pick the candidates that are acceptable to them and allow us a choice between two of their candidates.

When will America wake up? When will the average voter realize that it's hardly about political parties? They both serve the interests of the owners of the Federal Reserve to your detriment.

http://www.freedomtofascism.com/ if you haven't seen the movie your freedom depends upon it. But just watching the movie alone will not be enough. You must educate yourself independently and you must take action to inform and educate others. Then we must vote!

What you've heard here is merely the tip of the iceberg. Like all icebergs over 90% is below the surface. Contact Congressman Ron Paul's office and urge him to run for President. You don't have to vote for him or make that decision today. But without him in the Presidential race Americans will only have options that the owners of the Federal Reserve have pre-selected.

Answer 4

The president is supposed to honor the will of the people who elected him. In the present situation, the president did not even have the popular vote! And, since the election, the "popular opinion" has moved even more toward the other side. Of course he has more information than the average US citizen, but part of the information he has is that we, the people, do not like the direction he's taking us in. We don't like that he is not representing our wishes. It doesn't help that when he speaks to the people he speaks in platitudes and nebulous phrases that really don't tell us anything--except that he is going to do what he wants regardless of the will of the people.

It is very frightening to most of us that he can trample on our rights, call the Constitution "just a piece of paper", send BILLIONS of dollars in cash to the country we are fighting in without any way of tracing its whereabouts, hire the companies of his friends and cronies to "rebuild" a country we've torn down (without the benefit of a bidding war), send our youngsters into a "war" that now seems ill-conceived and is not getting any better, and make any decision he chooses because he is the self-proclaimed "decider".

He has two years left to serve, and has nothing to lose. I don't think he cares if he represents Republicans or Democrats; in the end, he will be able to live wherever he chooses in a life of luxury. He will not have to deal with the mess he has made--and I think we can all see, now, that it IS a mess!

We DO elect leaders to lead, but not if they are leading down into a dark, bottomless hole! We have the duty to complain and he is supposed to have the duty to listen!

Answer 5

It certainly has a lot to do with the decision. If it concerns highways, transportation, or where to build a building, most voters are happy to let that be up to someone else. But, when it comes to deciding the fate of this nation, where to send troops, and the integrity of borders, it is the responsibility of leadership to keep in touch with the public who hires them, and to reflect their opinions. Whenever a President has failed to do this, he has shortly thereafter lost his job, like LBJ did during Vietnam, Carter during the hostage crisis, or as Bush Sr. did over lying about taxation. A leader definitely needs to lead, but he must not fail to respect those he is leading, or he will find himself walking alone.
The President is supposed to have better information than the rest of us, but, in the case of this President, he gave us deliberately falsified information so we would agree with his decision. This only proves to us that we need to stay informed, or we may be lead anywhere. Bush's behavior denies the validity of the point you are trying to make.
How, look at this http://www.freedom.org/naugreen2/player.html

Answer 6

Yes,he works for the American voters,they gave him the job,is this being more qualified than the voters, As the Bush administration began assembling its case for war, analysts across the U.S. intelligence community were disturbed by the report of a secretive Pentagon team that concluded Iraq had significant ties to Al Qaeda.

Analysts from the CIA and other agencies "disagreed with more than 50%" of 26 findings the Pentagon team laid out in a controversial paper, according to testimony Friday from Thomas F. Gimble, acting inspector general of the Pentagon.

Answer 7

i think of all people who have been going to assist Obama, are doing so now. I doubt he will make any dent into McCain's lead. One in basic terms has to earnings Obama's economic stance and that's obvious that's a prescription for disaster. once you heap greater taxes on enormous or small employer, they bypass the fee onto the buyer, different sensible well-known via fact the voter.. whilst it includes enormous oil, which will impact each element of existence for the middle class. Who can locate the money for to have their heating invoice double alongside with electric, gas, nutrition, outfits and all of the purposes of existence. The tax advance will trickle down. evaluate the wellbeing care plan, worldwide poverty tax, greater suitable spending in coaching and the capability disaster. Obamas plan will take 10 years or greater to enforce and we are able to nonetheless want oil. He needs it to be center east oil, no nuclear capability, no sparkling coal and so on. Telling human beings you will supply them money to off set gas expenditures and having it take place are 2 countless issues. it seems Obamas plan is tax, spend, and supply it away. Redistribution of wealth is nice out of the karl marx education manual and it dosnt artwork. there is no longer one element anyone can factor to that Obama has executed in his political occupation that became "substitute". he's no longer a shown agent of substitute. a technique or the different the voters are in a position to sift via all of the rhetoric and make an stated decision. via fact the asserting is going, you could fool particularly some the human beings particularly some the time, yet you cant fool all the human beings consistently. Obama is desperate to fulfill with invoice Clinton for basic the form to win the election, (previous politics). might it no longer be greater effective just to be easy with the voters somewhat of attempting to trick them? that's what those campaigns have gotton right down to. Who could be fooled, how they could be fooled, and how lots BS the voters will fall for.

Answer 8

I believe that the President has the Constitutional responsibility to check with Congressional leaders before making important decisions. The Senate's Constitutional duty is to advise the President on appointments, and to consent, through their vote, to his choices. The House's Constitutional duty is to initiate monetary bills; once these bills have been passed by both Houses, it is the President's duty to either sign the bills into law and follow the law or to veto the bill; if Congress overrrides his veto, it is his duty to follow the law.

It is through Congress and Congressional off-year elections that the voters have a voice in what the President does. An overwhelming defeat of pro-Presidential candidates in an off-year election indicates that the electorate are displeased with the direction the country is taking, and wish to make a change. A wise President heeds this sign.

Answer 9

The people have a voice: on the first Tuesday following the first Monday in November every four years. We elect presidents to LEAD, not to watch the polls.

Answer 10

I don't think he has to check with the American voter but does have to make the decision that would be in the best interest of the American voters.