why is difficult for elected officals to keep his or her mandates?
545800
Issues and concerns change. The politician who does not change is often left high and dry. If a politician runs for a higher office than the one they currently hold, they have to take into account the larger, more diverse population which is eligible to vote for the higher office. \n\nPolitics is often called "the art of the possible," for these very reasons. It's also been said that "the primary job of a politician is to get re-elected." This implies that he or she must change with the people who elect him or her and reflect their concerns. Holding onto an early "mandate" can be very difficult when you have to change your original positions.\n\nOther problems: being elected on a "mandate" is one thing, actually DOING something about it when you get into office is quite another; many times, those elected on a "mandate" discover that they need more help getting the madate implemented than they can muster; there's also the fact that being together with other politicians in a location far from your constituents often makes the memory of why you were elected fade.\n\nPolitics is a constant game of balances and compromises.
929815
Well the concept is that the party's executive have a mandate to implement an agenda.  They need some assurance that when they put their legislation to parliament that they have the support necessary to pass it.\n\nBut I agree a PM and his executive along with party with a "whipped" and compliant stable of MPs becomes a near dictatorship between elections.  With no effective opposition to block the majority they can whip into place they can pass any legislation they want.\n\nIf you think the UK is bad -- Canada's parliament is worse in this respect -- if MPs vote against their party, especially the recently deposed Liberals, they were routinely shunned and expelled from the party, generally never to hold political office again once their current term was over as independant are almost never viable here.
288877
I'll try to be responsive, rather than attack or defend any particular leader.\n\nOften, elected officials will feel obligated to remain in office through good times and through bad times.  Whether the majority of people in a country still "like" the leader is just considered one of the trials of office, since ups or downs happen.  I've linked an article of Arroyo's recent diplomacy talks, which suggest that Arroyo is still respected in the international community.  When she was criticized internationally for declaring a state of emergency, she lifted that proclamation.  She has responded to both national and international pressure, in some circumstances.\n\nResignation is usually reserved for only extreme instances of misconduct or criminal investigation.  Simply having people dislike the leader is considered common.  The Filipino community will have a chance to vote later and make a choice for a new leader.
802483
Because man are full of wickedness and not consistent.\nExample can you trust politician.?
178340
Wow! These liberals never cease to amaze me.\n\nNo, a President cannot remain in office after a second term for ANY reason. Section 1 of the 22nd Amendment states:\n\n"No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term."\n\nNow, the danger lies in electing someone like Al Gore or John Kerry whose main concern is what the United Nations thinks. Both have stated that they would work in close cooperation with the United Nations. And if you think we have problems now, wait until Kofi Annan is calling the shot in our country.
461107
Many things go into the decision, the first is making sure that a specific statute or law applies to the offence. Second, unless they can be reasonably sure of a conviction, they will not proceed because they all rely on the arrest vs. conviction record when it's time to be elected again.
419199
President can not do specially to Endeavor - an individual.  He can only do in general to the public.  First do some good deeds to the Government. Do not expect the government to do all the help to you.  You help yourself and if possible help your neighbour also. It is service to the nation.  Then the government will take care of you. President can not look into each and every individual.  Right?
27197
He can't be elected to another term. There's no way to covertly assume that power, and the act of assuming the authority to run again would turn off enough voters that he'd lose the election.
123199
Those seeking more power or simply seeking to keep their job. Those at the top have more power to chang the rules so they have options if they don't like them.
634607
She has to reflect the policies of the President.  She is  a traveling "mouth-piece" of the USA President.  She is not allowed to say anything that is not approved of by the President and his advisors.... She is a puppet for the President.  If you can't trust her... it is because she has to reflect the policies that come down to her from the Oval Office.
254742
It's a matter of consistency.  The Senate is designed in such a way as to limit the disruption caused by elections.  Which is why only 1/3 of the Senate comes up for election every two years.
942011
Their system is different than ours. His party has already told him that he is OUT but they get to pick a specific time for the next election. I believe I heard it was next March.
292623
1. they are not elected\n2. They appointed for life
551820
Politics is the candidates' quest to persuade the voters to elect him/her. The ad campaigns, news conferences, and the debates. The ordinances you mentioned is the legislative process of governing. The constituents can only influence, not control, the way an elected official governs. If the community gets angry enough at the leaders, the community will vote them out of the next election. This is the system of a republic as opposed to pure democracy, which is simply majority rule, as seen in California's proposition system.
995944
I'm with you, the gov't stood by and let it happen, all in the name of big business.  Now that they're scared of getting booted out of office... oh yeah NOW they start to pay attention.  Politicians don't care about us, they only care about power and money.
287638
Yes they can make any law they want. They often do. We vote them in we can vote them out, but this doesn't appear to do the trick either in many instances. It it my opinion that the corrupt corrupt others, so it is a never ending cycle. Many people have given up, so it mekes their ability to "do what they want" easier.
897855
That's simple! The politicians don't want to lose face and as a result, lose power.