English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

In your opinion, should the Federal government do what the majority of people want, or should they go with their own opinions on an issue? I ask this because I was told by someone that President Bush is as unpopular as he is because he's better at decision making than the rest of us, but we just don't like his decisions. That's the dumbest ideology I've come across, but I thought I would get some other opinions?

2007-07-11 11:09:05 · 14 answers · asked by Adam C 3 in Politics & Government Government

14 answers

There are two sides to the question. We citizens can't be aware of all the issues that go on. Lots of issues we don't care about that much, so we elect people who represent our feelings in the main issues, and let them decide how to handle these small issues.

OTOH, on the big important issues--like war, etc--we all know how we feel. And our government is elected to REPRESENT US! If 60% of Americans believe the troops should come home yesterday, Bush has a lot of gall saying he knows better than us. Its not like he hasn't had the chance to explain the issue to us, to convince us.

So yes, I agree with you.

A good president might sometimes have to make a decision that is not popular. If he just chases the polls that's no good. But to just decide he's going to do whatever he wants and screw everyone else, that's not good!

2007-07-11 11:16:09 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Great question!

If a very large and diverse group people is given sufficient information and knowledge about the matter, it's been shown by numerous studies that their majority-driven collective decision will always be better than of any single person or a like-minded small group (similar to our politicians).

This the reason why dictatorships (where one person makes all the decisions) ultimately always fail.

Things become less certain when people don't have enough information, have falsified information (like evidence presented by Bush for going to war in Iraq) or do not have enough knowledge to understand complex issues they have to decide on. This is why when complex cases are tried in a court sytem before the jury, a considerable time may be spent to educate jurors on intricacies of complex legal, technological, medical or accounting issues.

In my opinion, the Government MUST always share ALL information with public and let the public decide. There should also be an easy way to obtain unbiased knowledge of the subject without stupid propaganda.

And, I have some great doubts that the politicians are experts in every they decide on anyway.

2007-07-11 11:59:24 · answer #2 · answered by AJ 5 · 0 0

Real Problem is that they make promises, and they know very well, they are not going to keep them or they know there is no way they can keep them. We have proof , with this new bunch. We can not expect for the government to tell us everything going on, some times , I can understand. I do think all of them should listen to the people that put them in office, but that want ever happen. Bush is unpopular because of the war, that all voted yes on. Another thing , Politicians should not be trying to run the war, they need to let the military handle it, if politic ans would stay out of it and let them do what they were sent there to do, we may see more good results. But it is the intention of this congress , after their broken promises to keep on harping on it, when they know good and well, if their person was the President, it would still be the same way. You think you do not like the decisions now, there may be a bigger surprise for you in 09 than you would have ever thought would happen. We have it good right now, no guarantees in 09.

2007-07-11 11:25:05 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Read Profiles in Courage by President Kennedy. He profiles several American leaders who showed political courage by not always doing what the majority wanted at the time.

I believe that we elect people to represent us and that we are trusting that person with the responsibility to do what is best for the country or state or city. It is not not just because the majority wants something that makes it right. If that was the case, then things like the Civil Rights Act wouldn't have been passed in 1964 because a majority of the population disagreed with it when it was proposed.

The leaders are just that; leaders. They are not mouthpieces. Our government is not a full/true democracy. It is a representative style. That means we ask others to make those decisions.

I may not agree with President Bush or really any of his decisions made during his Presidency, but that does not mean I think he should simply bend to the whim of a poll. Polls change weekly, sometimes daily. The questions are slanted toward a view and they are unreliable. The electorate has a voice, every two or four or six years to make their voice heard.

2007-07-11 11:17:25 · answer #4 · answered by Atty 1 · 1 1

I personally think that when the constitution was written it was written so that someone that was educated and well rounded but still an everyday individual would be put into political office so that the common man was represented. Unfortunately our elections have become popularity contests and who has the most money. Well here we are today with very little choices for our leaders and having to pick between the lesser of two evils.
With that said they are suppose to listen and represent us but with an educated sense of looking ahead at their decisions. If they don't agree with the majority they need to show why they don't and prove to us that we are wrong. Show us how their decision is better and why. Get the majority on their side.

2007-07-11 13:28:08 · answer #5 · answered by nashua_princess 2 · 0 0

NO!
The Representatives are democratically elected to run our Federal Republic. They are responsible for maintaining security, managing the treasury, and several other duties delineated in the Constitution. Once elected they can ONLY represent the people within the framework of the Constitution. If the PEOPLE want to take all the money, the representatives MUST say NO.
If 100% of the people want to surrender our sovernty to some dictator, the representatives MUST say NO!
A carefull reading of the constitution will indicate the correct answer to your question.
There are NO successfull Democracies in the entire world!
The U.S. is NOT a Democracy. (Review the above reasons.)

2007-07-11 11:47:01 · answer #6 · answered by Philip H 7 · 0 1

Our elected officials were voted in to represent the wishes of the people. Supposedly. And for the most part they probably know more about how government works than most of us do. Thinking they are right all of the time and disregarding the will of the people that put them in office shows a very egotistical personality. No one is right ALL the time.

2007-07-11 11:22:14 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Our elected officials are placed into their positions to make decisions that the general public cannot make. Their job is to make decisions on our behalf.

They are privy to information that the public can not and should not be allowed to see, for National Security reasons.

Our elected officials are not and have never been intended to be "parrots" of the latest poll.

2007-07-11 11:52:39 · answer #8 · answered by macDBH 2 · 0 0

D! heavily, the federal government screws each and every thing up that it touches...easily each and every thing. It has continuously been that way and it continuously will. shop it limited. transforming into the heck out of the problem would not artwork!

2016-09-29 13:17:16 · answer #9 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

This kind of reasonable question just doesn't apply right now, as our country has been taken over by an ignorant group of ex-frat boys, drunk on power and greed and without a drop of respect for our democracy, history, constitution, people...

2007-07-11 11:15:09 · answer #10 · answered by justagirl33552 4 · 4 1

fedest.com, questions and answers