I asserted a couple of days ago that Republican's have problems accepting that they are not the majority...witness the following
Listen to answer that fail Vice-presidential candidate Paul Ryan says at 2.01 in answer to the question: "Does Obama have a mandate?"
1 comment:
But he's totally right (unlike Trump), if a little unclear.
Obama does indeed have a mandate to control the executive branch, but he doesn't have a legislative mandate - as shown by Republicans holding a majority in the House (which is where, officially, all federal law must begin it's journey from bill to law, but it doesn't work like that now). And the executive branch exists to enforce the laws the legislative branch (House and Senate) come up with. Oh, and the President can veto laws/not enforce them. When people talk about a politician's mandate as President they don't typically mean a mandate to do their job of commanding the military, etc - they typically mean legislative agenda - creating and passing laws.
The American people gave no one a mandate, as they often do to either encourage bipartisanship, or to get the two sides at deadlock so neither can impose anything other than big compromise. We did it two years ago - giving no one a mandate to rule the Commons without having another party (as well as most of your own) on board as well - the Tory leadership is tempered by both their right flank, and the Lib Dems - both of whom they need to make a majority.
We see a similar principle in play in the CofE Synod - the odd rules did it's job of protecting minorities against the majority earlier in the year (thanks to certain members voting against what they wanted to avoid the crushing of the minority by the majority). Such a thing caused consternation as we have become hardened 'mob rule' people and struggle to understand tolerance and respect of those who disagree.
Post a Comment