Who would you want to represent you?

[Slava]

We pay these people to make decisions and keep things running. If they need to hold a referendum everytime there is a decision to be made then they should get out of the business!

[ResAlien]

Too bad anarchy isnt an option. If we're stuck w/ democracy i'd rather someone who I think represents my ideals, and is logical enough to make the choices for the greater good. People normally need to be protected from their own stupidity.

[STeeLy]

I'd go with option B...

I don't want a leader who cannot make up his mind and have the people in his riding make it for him...

But, it would be nice for the person that represents me to LISTEN to the general public's opinion, take that into account, then makes a decision that is best for everybody. Though most times, that is hard to do.

[Bobblehead]

Actually, this question first came to mind years ago with a friend who was running for student government. I felt the leaders should follow the will of the people, and he argued otherwise.

I think I have come around to his way of thinking. I would like my leaders to be smart people who would be willing to do the "right" thing instead of the politically expedient thing. You see many polls on TV and so on where some fairly sophisticated topics are boiled down into 15 words or less - and then an opinion is asked!

There are some topics that don't have a clear "right or wrong" side that the will of the populace should be used as a determining factor. But if everything was always majority rule then, by definition, minorities (be they groups or even simply opinions) would always lose.

As many here pointed out, the question is largely moot - many are forced to follow party lines, making the effectiveness of MPs, MLAs (or MPPs) questionable unless they are in a cabinet position. And politicians who can have the most free reign - local officials - often suffer from elections with the poorest turnouts.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

I want someone who follows the oath they swear to when they become a representative, and in the United States that means they are to up hold the constitution, which clearly states they are to vote according to the wishes of their constituents. There is a reason why the founding fathers framed the constitution in the manner they did. It was to provide safeguards against politicians getting elected and then implementing their agenda, especially if it went against the wishes of their constituents.

The problem behind this is the fact that you need an educated and rational electorate. With the amount of propaganda present in the media today, it is almost impossible to develop and educated electorate. Also, the general malaise that grips the general population makes this a challenge as well.

I don't think you can trust a politician to make any more a reasonable judgment than the average Joe on the street for the most part, and with the incredible power of lobbiests in the political arena, it is likely their judgment is more flawed than ever, but with the level of stupidity in the electorate today, it is hard to believe either choice makes much sense.