Yes, we can.

[Betty]

If they are truly representing "us", shouldn't they be loyal to public opinion? or is it too little too late for them to start that now since it never really mattered before?

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Betty

If they are truly representing "us", shouldn't they be loyal to public opinion? or is it too little too late for them to start that now since it never really mattered before?

No, they should represent our interests, not our demands.

[Gemini Cricket]

On another note, I had a wonderful conversation with Mum about politics tonight. It didn't get heated and we both were very cordial to each other. She worries about Palin's readiness to lead and is concerned about McCain's temper. She wants to like Obama, but she thinks he's not as smart as JFK. She also thinks that Michelle Obama is going to be another Hillary Clinton and be a puppeteer.

I asked her if she believed the silly rumor about Obama being a Muslim. And she said at first she did but is questioning it because there is no proof. I told her that he says he's a Christian. She wanted to know how long he was a Christian. I said it didn't matter, born again Christians are brand new and embraced by other Christians, so even if he was a 'new Christian' it shouldn't matter... Christian is Christian...

The most important part was that she was actually listening to my take on Obama. It was refreshing.

She honestly is considering protest voting. Leaving it blank. Which was interesting to hear. She is a die hard Republican (although she voted for Carter twice and loves loves loves JFK).

Oh, and she thought it was rude that McCain didn't look at Obama during the debate. She said she kept yelling at the TV for him to do just that.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by Betty

If they are truly representing "us", shouldn't they be loyal to public opinion? or is it too little too late for them to start that now since it never really mattered before?

Not necessarily, which is why we're a representative democracy and not a direct democracy. The fickleness of public opinion is one reason the Senate was specifically shielded from it with long six year terms in rotating waves.

If this "crisis" had arisen 12 months ago or six weeks from now, the behavior in the House of Representatives would be dramatically different knowing that there would be a period of time for the voters to either come to terms with it, to forget about it, or for it to work in a way that they can stand tall for having done it.

As far as blame for yesterday's embarrassment goes, I put it squarely on whoever is heading the Republican caucus (and whips) on this issue. Among the nays were both people acting simply for political reasons and people acting out of ideological principles.

But the bill should never have come to vote until both caucuses were sufficiently confident of passage. Either the Republican caucus failed to accurately count votes or they were unable to hold their internal agreements.