What Mandate? Well, first of all sparky, President Bush (I love writing that!) received more votes then any other candidate in U.S. history. 2nd, what of Clinton? In 1992, he only received slightly more then 2/5ths of the popular vote. 43.3%. That means 3/5ths of the country voted against him. In 1996, he received 50%. But everyone on the Left was saying he had a mandate. To be honest, those on the Right said he didn’t. But, he did. The People reaffirmed him as President. As they did with Bush. The Dems outspent the GOP, and out-sleazed the GOP. And all the Left has left is to play the "he cheated" card, with nothing other then feelings and innuendo. No hard proof of election fraud, and no reality, since, if there was fraud, it would have been on both sides. Neither Party is immune, nor free of guilt.
The photo is from the AP, same spot as in this post. I pulled it from the Brad Blog, though. I notice that he has avoided posting the photos of the American Flag being burned. 8th one down looks photoshopped, too.
No mandate? Time’s thoughts:
http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,1101921116,00.html
What is a mandate?
Over the past few months this word, mandate, has been thrown around rather liberally and I’m not sure if everyone gets the original concept behind it. For the direct answer I’m going to go to my Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary. So, to p…
What is a mandate? It is more than a simple electoral victory. It is running on a platform to accomplish certain specified taskes, if returned to office. The granting of the mandate through electoral victory grants the winner the moral authority to accomplish those tasks. Legally, no mandate is required. The winner already gets to do what he wishes.
This last election was a plebicite on the Iraq war and the commitment of US resources to follow through on it. By winning that election, Bush can claima mandate on Iraq. He cannot claim an open-ended mandate on all manner of other purposes that may enter his mind.