Seriously, why would anyone vote for...

from PolMach Forums
(continuing the thought in the subject line.... Why would anyone vote for...) ... a Senator or Congress-person for President?

I ask this because after talking with my wife the other day, I realized that one of the things that really lessens many of the Senators and Congress-persons as candidates for President is that these same individuals will tout their plans for the future and tell us all that they have fixes for all that ill's the country, yet they are the same individuals that typically sat in Congress and did next to nothing while there.

Sure, some of these candidates have had great records, sponsored much legislation, co-sponsored much, and helped vote for much along the way. But really, in the end, these individuals also had to be ignoring the "problems" they are promising to fix if they are elected to the office of President, or they must not have gotten much help from any of their party members while there, otherwise their solutions would already have been implemented.

It seems so hypocritical that someone who didn't have enough "leadership" while in Congress to get their important plans implemented can suddenly be able to get the same non-cooperative body (Congress) to go along with the plan(s) they promise they'll put into effect if they are elected by the voters.

Am I off base here? Or have I "discovered" why we seem to have elected so many former Governors and others to the office in recent history?
politics
1,529 views 1 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
Terpfan:

If you look historically at the roles of Senator/Congressperson and that of President they are both not the same role nor do they play to even the same people. A Representative (lumping together Senator and member of the House) is a coalition maker because only through coalitions can bills be passed into law. He is not concerned so much with how the public views his personal actions but rather the actions of the coalitions. Now, 2 of those coalitions are called the Democratic and Republican parties but many coalitions also exist within both and actually bipartisan groups exist also. Further, since the people who elected him are a small group in comparison with the entire country, he doesn't need to consider directly the values or interests of anyone other than his own electorate.

The President is the executive of the business called government. He is first and foremost an administrator who uses his standing as an elected representative of "all the people" to sway the direction of government (and society for that matter) by establishing policies that move the country in a certain direction. He has his "fingers on the pulse" of the people and is not so much interested in coalitions except to get what he believes is best for the country done.

There have, of course, been a mix of people who have served in Congress elected and those who didn't. Since World War II, Truman was a representative, Eisenhower was not, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, and Ford were, Carter wasn't. Neither was Reagan, Bush, or Clinton or current President Bush.

There is no magical formula to success in the White House. Circumstances dictate much of what happens. What you want to look for is a person who cares about people enough to listen to them, who is not afraid to admit he's wrong when things go badly in his policies and to do the "best" he can for the largest numbers of people.

I hope this helped.