President Bush vetoed the spending on some popular water projects. However, not only did the democrats vote to override his veto, but they were joined by 47 republicans. This may be the first time that Congress manages to override a veto by President Bush.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/07/washington/07spend.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Is this an affirmation of the anti-Bush sentiment?
What would a concrete affirmation be?
Is it just that so many elected republicans are voting against him?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
There might be some Republicans out there, if they are smart, that will not stay to loyal to Bush. President Bush has such a negative association that if these members of congress want to get re-elected, it might be in their best interest to not always side with Bush, just to separate themselves from such a hated president.
This just shows that there seems to be a conclusion between the two parties that George Bush is not doing the right thing. Finally there is a aomewhat united front against his terrible agenda.
There probably is a little anti-Bush sentiment just because he is doing such a bad job as President. Republicans can no longer automatically side with the President on congressional issues anymore just because he's Republican. There is a point where the Democrats and Republicans in Congress need to agree on some issues so that legislation can be passed. I think that these water projects are so popular that these 47 Republicans just don't care about the partisanship in politics. If there is a good bill, Congress will start to agree a little more now.
I think this just demonstrates that everyone is ready for a new president. Bush's choices are no longer supported, even by the republicans. I think its definatley fair that so many elected republicans are voting against him; they should be voting for or against proposals based on their merit, not just because they are supported or vetoed Bush.
Maybe it's not because people resent Bush and his policies, but rather that they actually think that this is a good idea...and thank goodness this is democracy going on in our government.
It's about time. Everybody running for the 2008 presidential campaign, even the Republicans, is not associating themself with Bush. As shown by the next blog post, Bush's vetoes aren't always in the best interest of the people and the people the Congress represents. There seems to be a dynamic change in the Bush-sentiment in the Republican party. I'm proud of this change and I can't wait to see what happens next.
It seems there is general concensus that people are glad about Congress stepping over Bush's actions. Although I'm not so sure that this 'democracy' between the parties is actually as good as people believe it to be. I mean it's great that for once both parties are contributing, but to what extent are the parties trying to help the public? At this point people are quite upset with Bush, and I think both parties understand that.
The democrats will stick to the same platforms and ideals; however, I think some Republics are only trying to seperate themselves from the Bush canidacy now to gain votes. Even if a Republican canidate connects with Bush, they won't commit political suicide and say they fully supported Bush. The voters of 2008 have vastly changed their viewpoints (ex. War in Iraq), and any old policy canidate will fail to suceed. At this point, it seems appealing to the public eye is more important than relaying one's true ideals.
Post a Comment