
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: When is a Mandate Not a Mandate?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://themoderatevoice.com/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/</link>
	<description>An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 07:46:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Harperbruce</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/comment-page-1/#comment-162907</link>
		<dc:creator>Harperbruce</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 17:12:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/media/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/#comment-162907</guid>
		<description>Looking at it from a purely mathematical standpoint, Obama doesn&#039;t have a &quot;mandate.&quot;  I&#039;d call it that if the spread was at least 10% or better; Obama led by only about 6%.  I don&#039;t think we can claim that Obama has this mysterious &quot;mandate&quot; any more than we insisted that Bush had a &quot;mandate&quot; after 2004, and that&#039;s my take at &lt;a href=&quot;http://harperbruce.net/index.php/2008/11/05/fresh-quick-thoughts-obama-election/&quot;&gt;my own blog&lt;/a&gt;, unless we look at the electoral spread.  If we did that back in 2004, then yes, Bush had a mandate as well.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;We can&#039;t have it both ways; we need to be consistent &lt;i&gt;(grin)&lt;/i&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Looking at it from a purely mathematical standpoint, Obama doesn&#39;t have a &#8220;mandate.&#8221;  I&#39;d call it that if the spread was at least 10% or better; Obama led by only about 6%.  I don&#39;t think we can claim that Obama has this mysterious &#8220;mandate&#8221; any more than we insisted that Bush had a &#8220;mandate&#8221; after 2004, and that&#39;s my take at <a href="http://harperbruce.net/index.php/2008/11/05/fresh-quick-thoughts-obama-election/">my own blog</a>, unless we look at the electoral spread.  If we did that back in 2004, then yes, Bush had a mandate as well.  </p>
<p>We can&#39;t have it both ways; we need to be consistent <i>(grin)</i>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ricorun</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/comment-page-1/#comment-162903</link>
		<dc:creator>Ricorun</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 16:57:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/media/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/#comment-162903</guid>
		<description>What good is declaring a mandate anyway? It seems to me things are as they are, despite the label applied. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/nov/04/20041104-121425-2090r/&quot;&gt;Bush declared a mandate&lt;/a&gt; after the 2004 elections too. Then seemed to spend his &quot;political capital&quot; in an extraordinarily short time to little effect, as I recall.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Anyway, I hope Obama doesn&#039;t get cocky.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What good is declaring a mandate anyway? It seems to me things are as they are, despite the label applied. <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/nov/04/20041104-121425-2090r/">Bush declared a mandate</a> after the 2004 elections too. Then seemed to spend his &#8220;political capital&#8221; in an extraordinarily short time to little effect, as I recall.</p>
<p>Anyway, I hope Obama doesn&#39;t get cocky.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ChrisWWW</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/comment-page-1/#comment-162894</link>
		<dc:creator>ChrisWWW</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 16:24:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/media/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/#comment-162894</guid>
		<description>The mandate is clear. Obama won platforming on a message of change, so obviously the mandate is for him to continue Republican policies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The mandate is clear. Obama won platforming on a message of change, so obviously the mandate is for him to continue Republican policies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marlowecan</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/comment-page-1/#comment-162870</link>
		<dc:creator>Marlowecan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 15:04:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/media/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/#comment-162870</guid>
		<description>Janienedm:  &quot;. . . partisans in either party will vote for a burlap sack filled with broken glass if it was listed for their party.&quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;As the eminent philosophe and bon vivant Homer Simpson observed:  &quot;It&#039;s funny cause it&#039;s true.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Janienedm:  &#8220;. . . partisans in either party will vote for a burlap sack filled with broken glass if it was listed for their party.&#8221;</p>
<p>As the eminent philosophe and bon vivant Homer Simpson observed:  &#8220;It&#39;s funny cause it&#39;s true.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marlowecan</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/comment-page-1/#comment-162863</link>
		<dc:creator>Marlowecan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 14:56:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/media/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/#comment-162863</guid>
		<description>&quot;Blatant hypocrisy?&quot;  Hahahahahahaha...&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Pull out the Wayback Machine, and dial back to 1984 and Ronald Reagan landslide victory over Mondale.  Reagan won every state but one, with a margine of victory of 18% . . . dwarfing that of Barack Obama several fold.&lt;br&gt;The editorial page of the New York Times declared that this was &quot;not a mandate&quot; in any way, shape or form. . . a theme it hammered past the inauguration.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Indeed, there was a cottage industry among academics at the time, unanimously declaring Reagan lacked a mandate in both his elections. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Here is an interesting book review &quot; DOES REAGAN HAVE A MANDATE? &quot; from 1981 from . . . wait for it . . . yes, the New York Times.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DEED91238F934A35755C0A967948260&quot;&gt;http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Novak is simply being partisan.   &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Of course, perhaps he is suffering from his brain tumor. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt; If so, what is the excuse of the editors of the New York Times?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Blatant hypocrisy?&#8221;  Hahahahahahaha&#8230;</p>
<p>Pull out the Wayback Machine, and dial back to 1984 and Ronald Reagan landslide victory over Mondale.  Reagan won every state but one, with a margine of victory of 18% . . . dwarfing that of Barack Obama several fold.<br />The editorial page of the New York Times declared that this was &#8220;not a mandate&#8221; in any way, shape or form. . . a theme it hammered past the inauguration.</p>
<p>Indeed, there was a cottage industry among academics at the time, unanimously declaring Reagan lacked a mandate in both his elections. </p>
<p>Here is an interesting book review &#8221; DOES REAGAN HAVE A MANDATE? &#8221; from 1981 from . . . wait for it . . . yes, the New York Times.</p>
<p><a href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DEED91238F934A35755C0A967948260">http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=&#8230;</a></p>
<p>Novak is simply being partisan.   </p>
<p>Of course, perhaps he is suffering from his brain tumor. </p>
<p> If so, what is the excuse of the editors of the New York Times?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AustinRoth</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/comment-page-1/#comment-162857</link>
		<dc:creator>AustinRoth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 14:46:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/media/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/#comment-162857</guid>
		<description>It is a sweeping victory, and certainly within the range of what has been called a mandate in prior elections.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;There are two traps or caveats, though, for the Democrats.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The first is determining WHAT mandate was given. That has been the usual reason for the new party in power to lose their &#039;mandate&#039; quickly - a combination of misconstruing what policy changes the voters think they wanted a mandate to address, and overreaching and deciding that the mandate was obviously EVERYTHING the winning party wanted to do. The Gingrich mandate is probably the best example of that folly.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The second is that they must remember that as low as Bush&#039;s approval ratings are, Congress has even lower ratings. They are starting from a huge whole. They will need to have some early successes and improve upon the overall image of Congress, or they will take the blame ultimately for any continued recession. It is not fair, bu tit is politics.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Finally, I saw this quote from The Onion referenced on Instapundit, and there is a large grain of truth in it:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&quot;African-American man Barack Obama, 47, was given the least-desirable job in the entire country Tuesday when he was elected President of the United States of America. In his new high-stress, low-reward position, Obama will be charged with such tasks as completely overhauling the nation&#039;s broken-down economy, repairing the crumbling infrastructure, and generally having to please more than 300 million Americans and cater to their every whim on a daily basis. . . . The job comes with such intense scrutiny and so certain a guarantee of failure that only one other person even bothered applying for it. Said scholar and activist Mark L. Denton, &#039;It just goes to show you that, in this country, a black man still can&#039;t catch a break.&#039;&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is a sweeping victory, and certainly within the range of what has been called a mandate in prior elections.</p>
<p>There are two traps or caveats, though, for the Democrats.</p>
<p>The first is determining WHAT mandate was given. That has been the usual reason for the new party in power to lose their &#39;mandate&#39; quickly &#8211; a combination of misconstruing what policy changes the voters think they wanted a mandate to address, and overreaching and deciding that the mandate was obviously EVERYTHING the winning party wanted to do. The Gingrich mandate is probably the best example of that folly.</p>
<p>The second is that they must remember that as low as Bush&#39;s approval ratings are, Congress has even lower ratings. They are starting from a huge whole. They will need to have some early successes and improve upon the overall image of Congress, or they will take the blame ultimately for any continued recession. It is not fair, bu tit is politics.</p>
<p>Finally, I saw this quote from The Onion referenced on Instapundit, and there is a large grain of truth in it:</p>
<p>&#8220;African-American man Barack Obama, 47, was given the least-desirable job in the entire country Tuesday when he was elected President of the United States of America. In his new high-stress, low-reward position, Obama will be charged with such tasks as completely overhauling the nation&#39;s broken-down economy, repairing the crumbling infrastructure, and generally having to please more than 300 million Americans and cater to their every whim on a daily basis. . . . The job comes with such intense scrutiny and so certain a guarantee of failure that only one other person even bothered applying for it. Said scholar and activist Mark L. Denton, &#39;It just goes to show you that, in this country, a black man still can&#39;t catch a break.&#39;&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: janinedm</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/comment-page-1/#comment-162852</link>
		<dc:creator>janinedm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 14:40:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/media/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/#comment-162852</guid>
		<description>The way this country is right now, 45% is the floor for both parties nationally. You&#039;ll find strong leans regionally (NYC is very blue, your average county in Texas is very red), but partisans in either party will vote for a burlap sack filled with broken glass if it was listed for their party. So the mandate is measured by the degree to which you can get the independents to move to your side.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The way this country is right now, 45% is the floor for both parties nationally. You&#39;ll find strong leans regionally (NYC is very blue, your average county in Texas is very red), but partisans in either party will vote for a burlap sack filled with broken glass if it was listed for their party. So the mandate is measured by the degree to which you can get the independents to move to your side.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kritt11</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/comment-page-1/#comment-162847</link>
		<dc:creator>kritt11</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 14:22:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/media/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/#comment-162847</guid>
		<description>Novak is an old GOP warrior, partisan down to the  last molecule of his being. Which in this case means delusional!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Novak is an old GOP warrior, partisan down to the  last molecule of his being. Which in this case means delusional!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stevenw</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/comment-page-1/#comment-162841</link>
		<dc:creator>stevenw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 13:41:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/media/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/#comment-162841</guid>
		<description>What you are missing out on by just doing number-crunching, is, that with all the things that Obama &amp; the Dems had going for them plus what McCain &amp; GOP had going against them, the bar for an Obama mandate is significantly higher than it was for Bush. Looked at that way, the vote tallies are sort of disappointing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What you are missing out on by just doing number-crunching, is, that with all the things that Obama &#038; the Dems had going for them plus what McCain &#038; GOP had going against them, the bar for an Obama mandate is significantly higher than it was for Bush. Looked at that way, the vote tallies are sort of disappointing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hot Air &#187; Blog Archive &#187; No mandate?</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/comment-page-1/#comment-162840</link>
		<dc:creator>Hot Air &#187; Blog Archive &#187; No mandate?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 13:35:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/media/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/#comment-162840</guid>
		<description>[...] as Jazz Shaw points out, Novak declared 2004 a &#8220;mandate&#8221; for George Bush.  In that election, Bush [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] as Jazz Shaw points out, Novak declared 2004 a &#8220;mandate&#8221; for George Bush.  In that election, Bush [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: shaun</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/comment-page-1/#comment-162832</link>
		<dc:creator>shaun</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 12:38:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/media/24123/when-is-a-mandate-not-a-mandate/#comment-162832</guid>
		<description>Amen, Jazz.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;In fact, I&#039;ll take this out a little further: &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Being stricken with a life-threatening illness changes many people.  Think Lee Atwater.  But Novak is likely to go to his grave not getting the joke.  That it was on himself.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Amen, Jazz.</p>
<p>In fact, I&#39;ll take this out a little further: </p>
<p>Being stricken with a life-threatening illness changes many people.  Think Lee Atwater.  But Novak is likely to go to his grave not getting the joke.  That it was on himself.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

