He hardly one either election (didn't actually win the first, in a situation so bad other countries contemplated overseeing the next US election).
Our president does not have the support of the population, do you think there is something wrong with that?
2007-03-19 02:39:31 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
He didn't deserve to be in office before he lost his support.
He didn't win a fair election.
2007-03-19 02:43:58 · answer #1 · answered by Enigma 6 · 2⤊ 7⤋
I am no fan of Bush, but the way the American constitution works, it doesn't matter how popular he is right now. He is still entitled to be president.
Personally I think most of the research goes to show that the first election in 2000 was a total disgrace and he almost certainly didn't win it, but he did win the second, seemingly, and therefore he's entitled to be in office.
As far as I can see he should only stop being president between now and 2008 if he resigns for personal reasons, is impeached for something, or dies.
That's the way the system works. Popularity has nothing to do with it. Welcome to democracy. ;)
2007-03-19 09:51:40 · answer #2 · answered by Saint Bee 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If you had taken college statistics you would realize how the media can take their polls of a few hundred or a few thousand people and make a justification of what the entire population "Might" think or feel.
They can so easily be manipulated by where they are asked and how the question is worded. A crafty person designing a poll could take a poll of a group that would totally be in support of something and make it appear to be negative.
Try thinking for yourself and not relying on fabricated data. From either side.
2007-03-19 09:48:20 · answer #3 · answered by Jay 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
"He hardly one either election" ? "won"...
He did win the first, you're just a fool and know nothing about the electoral college. Secondly, he then "won" the 2nd election by a wider margin than Gore had over him... clearly this is just another case of the disgruntled is louder than the happy...
National security is high on my list and so far since 9-11 nothing extreme has happened here in the states... why? We're kicking *** overseas. Enough said.
Go back to school and learn a thing or two about spelling and also politics.
*Note: I won't vote republican next election because we're spending WAYYYYYY too much...
2007-03-19 09:50:02 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
There is no "popularity" clause in the Constitution. I'd rather have a president who acts on what he feels in is the best interest of the nation, than one who is out there trying to be "popular". Popularity contests should be left for the jr. high schools kids. Its a hard job, not one that I would want - at least give them some respect for that, whether you agree or disagree.
If we bump a president out every time the numbers drop, then they may as well install a revolving door on the Whitehouse.
2007-03-19 09:50:05 · answer #5 · answered by steddy voter 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
He won both elections and it is clear the better man won in both.
Once elected into office, the President is not bound to make decision based on the polls. He does what he thinks is right for the country.
I always get a kick out of pouting Liberals who say the admin doesn't take their demands seriously. Vote him out. Oh yeah...you tried that already...
2007-03-19 09:49:58 · answer #6 · answered by Philip McCrevice 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Have any of you ever been polled....I don't know a single person who has....but then again most of the people I know are conservative. If they called me and asked "Do you support President Bush's stance on immigration?" - I would answer no and that could be interpreted as me not supporting the president, which on most cases I do. I don;t really follow polls too much becasue they are still subjective and can be pushed to either side.
2007-03-19 09:47:40 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
As far as the first election he did win.
What trouble me is how Gore wanted to rewrite the counting laws to suit his own purposes and discount the military vote.
NY Times even said Gore won Fl in the end.
The second was a majority of voters so that should have been enough. Something Clinton didn't do.
So he is elected and go from there and this ruling but polls is no way to run a country.
2007-03-19 09:44:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 1⤋
Absolutely YES...
It means he is ignoring the ignorant mob and is doing
what is best for the country....This takes courage and conviction.
This is why he was elected...Courage and Conviction...
Abraham Lincoln threw anyone and everyone who spoke
out against him or the war into jail without trial or hearings
until the war was over and then released them..
Abe Lincoln was a very unpopular president at the time...
2007-03-19 09:46:39 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
That isn't relevant. The President has a responsibility to discharge his duties in the manner he sees is best for the country. If others disagree, they can express their concern at the voting booths.
2007-03-19 09:43:11 · answer #10 · answered by desotobrave 6 · 7⤊ 0⤋
He still had a higher percentage vote for him both times than Clinton. Do you think something is wrong with that?
Elections are held every four years for a reason.
2007-03-19 09:46:49 · answer #11 · answered by C B 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋