y leader must plan his policy based not only on its own “merits” but on also on the following who’s continued support he requires.” This is a sad reality of politics. A policy, especially a foreign policy, should be in line with the principles of the nation and based on what is wrong and right. But instead great sources of influence are different interest groups and lobbyists. The President is an elected official and part of his motivation, which maybe harmful, is what effect his policy will have on his re-election. Another aspect more specifically related to foreign policy formation is given on page 154, “The incidence of policy determines the relation between the leader and the following. If those whom he needs in his plan are remote from where the action takes place, if the results are hidden or postponed, if the individual obligations are indirect or not yet due, the leader is likely to have a free hand.” This is mostly true for all foreign policy decisions. The masses are much more opinionated when it comes to a President’s domestic policy then to the decisions he makes concerning foreign policy because they are not directly affected by them. According to Lippmann as long as the President can convince the public that the foreigners will pay the bills for whatever action is taken and that Americans will benefit by it, he is pretty much free to proceed as he likes. Foreign policy has the dangerous advantage of removing its effects from the public that elected the official who is making the policy. The limit of direct action for all intents and purposes is to say “yes” or “no” to an issue presented to the mass. Another related point that Lippmann makes is given on page 156, “Leaders are not statesmen, and are constantly mending their fences, which can consist of offering an occasional scapegoat, affecting a powerful individual or faction, or actin...
