Mandates and what a vote means

[ok doser]

All a mandate really means is that you have a large body of support for your agenda.

does trump have an agenda?


beyond getting elected?

 

[rexlunae]

does trump have an agenda?


beyond getting elected?

I think his agenda is to sell the government to the highest bidder, pocketing the proceeds.

 

[ok doser]

I think his agenda is to sell the government to the highest bidder, pocketing the proceeds.

i'd like to get me one of these

 

[ok doser]

and maybe a little boat to put it on

 

[Tambora]

There has been a lot of talk about whether or not Trump has a mandate and that isn't my interest here. It's about the idea of having a mandate in general. If a president wins the EC and the popular vote, does that necessarily they have a mandate? A mandate for everything they campaigned on? People vote for a wide variety of reasons. A vote doesn't mean you are advocating for everything the candidate campaigned for. Some people might have voted for Trump because of Supreme Court nominees. Others because of economic reasons. Others because of immigration. Others because they'd like to see what a businessman can do in the office. Any number of combinations. Granted, in today's polarized blue/red US it's probably common for a voter to generally agree with all the candidates stances. But this election pitted two unusually disliked candidates so there were a lot of people who weren't voting based on enthusiastic support of the candidate and could be even riskier to talk about mandates.

There are various polls done, including exit polling, but I wish there was a more systematic approach to getting data from voters about WHY they voted for a particular candidate and what issues were most important to them. It might yield some interesting results. :idunno:

I actually liked most everything Trump campaigned for.
And how crudely he said it had little (if any) impact on me. I knew what he meant. And it was actually a little refreshing to not hear the usual overblown PC sugar coating.

 

[Nick M]

Rex is confused on who sold the White House for contributions to the Clinton Crime Family Foundation.

 

[ClimateSanity]

I think his agenda is to sell the government to the highest bidder, pocketing the proceeds.

How exactly would that work?

 

[kmoney]

fool is partially right that it's largely a rhetorical device.

I think that's where I'm going with this also. Talk of a mandate seems pretty pointless. It can indicate a general legitimacy to lead but beyond that I don't see much value. I wouldn't even say what you said about having a large body of support for your agenda. It might, but not necessarily. I don't know if it's practical but I'd still be interested in gathering more data from voters.

 

[kmoney]

I actually liked most everything Trump campaigned for.

And there are probably many like you. I also think many weren't.

And how crudely he said it had little (if any) impact on me. I knew what he meant. And it was actually a little refreshing to not hear the usual overblown PC sugar coating.

Specifically?

 

[DavidK]

so you prefer a definition that includes a majority?

a simple majority or a strong majority?

I'm not sure I have a preference, or that it matters if I do. Definitions are up to a consensus among speakers of the language. What do most educated writers mean when they talk about a "mandate".

Ultimately, the question, "does Trump have a mandate" is really a question of whether or not there is enough political will behind Trump's agenda that he should be able to move forward relatively unimpeded with that agenda. Majority votes or majority seats, that's what I understand "mandate" to mean.

And that would be why supporters regularly claim mandates and detractors regularly question them.

One thing that should be part of the discussion on whether or not he has a mandate is whether he has a coherent enough agenda to even make a mandate make sense. Even among Trump supporters there is confusion about what exactly he really wants to do versus the things that he says but does not really mean. People supported him out of specific emotional responses, some even hoping that he wouldn't do some of the things he said. In that context, what kind of mandate could he possibly have?

 

[ok doser]

trump has a mandate by virtue of having won the election

(certainly much more of a mandate than hillary has :chuckle: )

perhaps kmonkey's original question would have been better worded as "how much of a mandate does trump have?"

 

[quip]

trump has a mandate by virtue of having won the election

Same for the press. :readthis:

 

[ok doser]

the press won the election too? :freak:

 

[quip]

the press won the election too? :freak:

And how!

 

[quip]

And how!

Like sharks win chum :TomO:

 

[ok doser]

:think:

interesting concept

so the MSM's constant attacks on trump and their willingness to overlook hillary's faults were just a ruse to get four years of choatic newsworthiness out of a trump presidency?


was putin behind it, or is that just a manufacture too?

 

[quip]

:think:

interesting concept

so the MSM's constant attacks on trump and their willingness to overlook hillary's faults were just a ruse to get four years of choatic newsworthiness out of a trump presidency?


was putin behind it, or is that just a manufacture too?

No...Soros :chuckle:

It's called a silver-lining...4 years of material. (at least)

 

[ok doser]

No...Soros :chuckle:

It's called a silver-lining...4 years of material. (at least)

i wonder if john stewart and alec baldwin chipped in :think:

 

[quip]

i wonder if john stewart and alec baldwin chipped in :think:

Aren't they the press?

 

[ok doser]

well, they're all part of the entertainment industry

as is trump