US Elections

[Homer55]

What does it mean, I know the democrats have won the majority of the votes does that mean that Bush is out or does he have to get voted out... its all very confusing

[Loosehead]

Bush stays until the end of his term, the elections for congress do not effect the presidency. The results will make it more difficult for Bush to operate though but barring impeachment he stays till his 2nd lot of 4 years are up.

[kwicky]

It seems strange to me. The two most guilty men on the planet, Bush and Blair, manage to keep their jobs while the minnows or lower order either resign or get fired?

[andy-hughes]

Bush will become a 'lame duck' president with limited power, and at long last, thank God, his psychopathic urge to inflict his version of 'freedom' on innocent people can be curtailed. He still talks about 'not leving Iraq until the job is done ...' and 'victory' - what 'job? what victory?

Donald Rumsfeld has had to take the bullet for Bush - althugh having been a member of government during the Viet nam war, you'd think old Don would have learned the lesson about America butting into other country's business and getting its bottom soundly kicked, - not forgetting the 'collatoral damage' of several hundred thousands lives lost on both sides.

Bush is an idiot, a terrorist, a war-monger and utterly contemptable of the groundswell of opinion among the people he represents - until today. Better late than never I say.

[henneth]

With the threat of subpoena facing him, Rumsfeld did a runner. He didn't want to face the Democrat enquiries into Iraq so he fled, withdrew, decamped. Must have echoed his experiences with Vietnam.

[Loosehead]

come on Andy, don't beat about the Bush! Tell us what you really think!

[Stu in USA]

Sadly Bush was voted in 2 years ago and will serve the full term of 4 years. As this is his 2nd term he cannot stand for re-election in 2 years. What is perhaps confusing for non Americans is that another party can control the rest of Government, a first for GWB's administation, but actually quite common. It happened to Clinton and Reagan.

[buildersmate]

So can a President, any President, get anything done if he can't get the necessary voting / funding through the House of Reps? Has he got Federal $$$ available to him from other sources?

[Stu in USA]

It's called "bipartisan co-operation" and many argue it makes better government and who knows may have prevented Iraq nightmare. Yes the President is beholden to Congress for funding etc, so look for change in direction here in USA.

[jno]

I don't think Rumsfeld is taking the rap for Bush: he was in charge of the logistics of invading Iraq, and hopelessly underestimated the scale fo the task all along. Generals have been telling him for years that there aren't enough men there to do the job; he's ignored them.

It's possible of course that the only way to get enough men (and women) there is to re-introduce conscription. I don't think this is politically feasible; so Bush's options are limited. He has two years to go, and the only good news for him is that the Democrats haven't got the faintest idea what to do either. (Or rather, they have a dozen different ideas and don't agree on any of them.) But they didn't start the war so they are unlikely to end up carrying the can, which is only fair.

[JRB]

It is a bit like having a minority government in the UK. The party in power has more seats than any other individual party but less than all other parties combined. Usually the governing party tries to come to an agreement with one other party to get their support, and "pays" for this by backing some of their proposed bills.