If you Were President of the USA or Mayor Of Granite City?Archived Message
Posted by 3's and D's on April 8, 2011, 10:50 pm
...or anything else in between...
What would you do?
Would you campaign on a set platform and set of principles and stand on it no matter what? And only change in emergencies?
Or would you pander to the middle and look at the changing tides of the voting populace and change your policy to satisfy the needs of the people as evidenced by devices such as polling?
Are people who pander really weak people-pleasers, or is it a good way to serve the needs of the people?
Do the strong people have it right or the panderers.
Now I have no problem admitting Obama is a panderer. I think Clinton (the last good president we had) was also a panderer as well. Maybe Bush Sr was too, I was too young to really get to know what he was about. Baby Bush pandered too - especially on issues like Immigration - one of the few issues he was RIGHT about. It was too bad it took him to his last year to be right about SOMETHING.
Anyway..
When elected -- what is the obligation? (Not explicit Constitutional duties -- but let's say moral obligation)
Is it to enact strictly the programs upon which they built the campaign?
Or...
Is it to see the changing needs of the people and try to respond to them?