Debate about the presidential election

[Jordan Larsan]

Debate: Does the losing party in a presidential election have an obligation to support the newly elected President’s policy agenda?

 

[Tom Sweetnam]

Don't be ridiculous.

 

[Nyvin]

Not anymore apparently...

 

[JoeMoma]

Debate: Does the losing party in a presidential election have an obligation to support the newly elected President’s policy agenda?

No!

 

[Roadrunner]

Not anymore apparently...

When was it?

 

[JoeMoma]

Debate: Does the losing party in a presidential election have an obligation to support the newly elected President’s policy agenda?

If the newly president's policy agenda sucks then the losing party should oppose it.

 

[Nyvin]

Not anymore apparently...

When was it?

The Bush years

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Debate: Does the losing party in a presidential election have an obligation to support the newly elected President’s policy agenda?

Obligation to support the newly elected president -- yes.

Obligation to support the Newly elected President's agenda -- no.

It's called "loyal opposition" for a reason, folks.

 

[JoeMoma]

Are we debating yet?

 

[birddog]

It's too early to really tell, but in a couple of years we may be talking about President Walker.

 

[Nyvin]

It's too early to really tell, but in a couple of years we may be talking about President Walker.

Gezus i hope not.

 

[deaddogseye]

Absolutely not. if anything to the extent he needs the support of the other party it is incumbent upon the President to go out and get it -- hes really the one who has to give - assuming he needs their support -- not them

 

[candycorn]

I don't think so. The opposition has the responsibility to it's constituents to be true to them however. When the President suggests a middle class tax cut--something that Romney ran on--and the GOP suddenly opposes it; it becomes pretty clear pretty quickly that the opposition is just there to oppose whatever he proposed.