TumblingHippo
Member
I wish I had enough faith in our future/country/DNC to believe in either of these outcomes :c
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2016 |OT16| Unpresidented
- Thread starter ItWasMeantToBe19
- Start date
- Status
I wish I had enough faith in our future/country/DNC to believe in either of these outcomes :c
You're doing that thing again.
Constitutions are composed of constitutional laws -- explicit but never complete -- and constitutional norms, implicit agreements in order to make government run smoothly. (The United Kingdom is a good study here, since a much larger percentage of its constitution is norms.)
Constitutional crises mostly don't involve violation of constitutional laws (although if Trump takes office we'll have that, via the Emoluments Clause). They mostly involve violations of constitutional norms, and are resolved by the creation of some new law and agreement of new norms.
A good example of a relatively minor constitutional crisis is FDR's third and fourth terms. Not against the law, but a violation of extremely longstanding constitutional norms (Grant wanted to run for a third term and was told it would make him look like a dictator). Obviously it went on for a while due to FDR's popularity, but once FDR was gone they passed an amendment to prevent any president from serving more than two terms again. Crisis solved.
In the last eight years we've been dealing with a serious violation of constitutional norms in the form of a GOP congress simply unwilling to do the basic job of governance. We've been compensating for that by moving more power to the executive branch -- note that bills passed during Obama's tenure tend to give the executive much more latitude to control the implementation of the laws than prior bills, because everybody knows Congress won't be doing the work of fixing details later. DACA is another example of Obama using executive power to carry out a generally popular policy that prior presidents would have looked to Congress to implement. But the executive branch isn't really supposed to be that powerful -- it is supposed to depend on the legislative branch to set high-level policy, then take responsibility for the details. Ths shift of power is not healthy.
Dominican Power
Member
This is madness.
LostMyNarbles
Member
Only scenario I see the Republicans impeaching Trump in is if he decides to stop listening to them at some point or causes them trouble which I don't see happening with Pence and his Cabinet keeping him in-line. All the GOP needs to do his stroke his ego and he'll sign whatever hits his desk. Worst case scenario they can threaten impeachment to force him to play ball.
whyamihere
Banned
This is madness.
wat
balladofwindfishes
Member
One of the biggest electoral college wins in history?
lol what
lol what
What the
This is madness.
What cabinet? It's full of a bunch of Trump yesmen and yeswomen.
And looking at the social security stuff, yeah, it's just like I predicted. The current people on Social security will be fine. It's as soon as you start getting to 2023 that things turn to shit. Which, God willing, will be right in the middle of a Democratic president cycle, so they will be blamed for it.
Brawly Likes to Brawl
Member
This is madness.
The pussygate scandal had a longer response statement than this.
This is madness.
Hey, this is progress! At least they aren't saying he also won the popular vote if millions of illegals didn't vote.
CoffeeJanitor
Member
AntraxSuicide
Banned
All of his missteps as President can be traced to his naivete. Obama has always thought (probably still does) that the GOP might someday work in good faith with Dems.
Honestly, this issue is probably the best quality about Hillary and the quality where she has the edge on all other Democrats. She fucking knows how awful the GOP is. She wouldn't help that rotting corpse of a political party under any circumstance.
The left needs to give up on the right. They're in their bubble, and they'll die there until their rural regions fade into nothing as their kids flee to the cities. Fuck 'em. Only people talking in good faith should be allowed at the table.
I agree strongly. I want him reminded weekly that he is hated. I want him to dip below Dubya and Hoover for hated Presidents. This fucker better leave office in the same place Hitler's in now.
This country is teetering on the edge of being a complete and utter joke. This is an emperor's new clothes moment.
He repeatedly dismissed the conclusions of the intelligence community during the campaign. No surprises here. This is what a large percentage of the country wanted: a moron who dismisses advice from experts.This is important.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Instead he did the total opposite.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
That's a good point. Hope they stick to it, but i'm still pretty worried.
TheLaughingStock
Member
Lol the Obama administration is already known for sitting, watching, and looking the other way when folks are up to no good. Torture, fraud....you name it...the pragmatic approach according to Pres. Obama and his supporters is to pretend it didn't happen and not pursue. Pres. Obama and his team are a joke.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
aspiegamer
Member
Consider this, on Obama: It's his duty to preserve the smooth, peaceful transfer of power between administrations. That's a pretty sacred thing that this country has always managed to hang on to. Let's say he's known something happened on election day (hypothetical). What does he do with that info? The Constitution doesn't account for these sorts of situations. We have an election day, period. There could be footage of Putin personally manipulating a spreadsheet of vote totals and there's not actually any thing you can do with that on the national level. Vote certification is on the state level and up to states to investigate what they feel is appropriate. Hell, Bush v Gore backs up the idea of getting certified vote totals in ASAP to prevent any nastiness because we have so many different voting and tallying systems.
A post here asked if this was a constitutional crisis. Obama stubbornly pushing forward regardless of background noise is preventing it from being one. I would not be shocked if some revelations come out on or after inauguration day and that Obama was deliberately holding off on the details. By letting Trump come in first, it's entirely on Republicans' shoulders to sort out public anger. You can always try to fix things later via constitutional means, but there's no going back in our nation's history if he tried to suspend the process of peaceful transition of power right now. That would be an actual constitutional crisis.
... I would still be legit furious at Obama, lol, if he had some smoking gun this whole time. Cannot lie. But as a constitutional lawyer he's thinking big picture. I truly hope none of this ever happens.
A post here asked if this was a constitutional crisis. Obama stubbornly pushing forward regardless of background noise is preventing it from being one. I would not be shocked if some revelations come out on or after inauguration day and that Obama was deliberately holding off on the details. By letting Trump come in first, it's entirely on Republicans' shoulders to sort out public anger. You can always try to fix things later via constitutional means, but there's no going back in our nation's history if he tried to suspend the process of peaceful transition of power right now. That would be an actual constitutional crisis.
... I would still be legit furious at Obama, lol, if he had some smoking gun this whole time. Cannot lie. But as a constitutional lawyer he's thinking big picture. I truly hope none of this ever happens.
There should be calls to get NYT's public editor Liz Spayd replaced. She's a corporate manager thirsting for revenue first and a journalist second.
When Fox News asked her about these tweets from NYT reporters, instead of defending them she called it outrageous and said they should be disciplined. Fuck her.
http://www.businessinsider.com/new-york-times-public-editor-reporters-trump-tweets-2016-12
http://thebaffler.com/blog/neutering-the-news-lehmann
Fuck interpretation.
When Fox News asked her about these tweets from NYT reporters, instead of defending them she called it outrageous and said they should be disciplined. Fuck her.
http://www.businessinsider.com/new-york-times-public-editor-reporters-trump-tweets-2016-12
http://thebaffler.com/blog/neutering-the-news-lehmann
Fuck interpretation.
metalslimer
Member
Yeah I remember when it happened last year and it got brushed off because lol Trump. We were still at the point of Nate Silver vehemently arguing against him having a shot at the nomination.
Also fuck protocol. The FBI didn't mind getting invloves at the tail end of an election with no evidence whatsoever. This why democrats will continue to lose. They want to play a fair game with a bunch of monsters.
A year old article when I don't even think he thought he would be the nominee.
There's already no going back.
This whole theory really just assumes that Trump will be a normal bad Republican president. But there is no particular reason to assume that. Obama even said specifically that he didn't believe that, as did our entire political class. Trump is a fascist and a white nationalist. Allowing WWIII to start or atrocities to happen because you're worried about constitutional legitimacy would be a sad joke.
ImpracticalPassword
Member
So the announcement today that Obama was ordering an investigation into Russia's meddling was because WaPo contacted them for a quote for this CIA story, right? I was surprised when I read that this morning, because he had been acting almost blasé about Russian interference thus far (and frankly, it felt like an empty gesture). It makes more sense to me that the administration would try to preempt criticism.
Wait what?
Edit: "Adam Jentleson is the Deputy Chief of Staff for Senator Harry Reid"
Worth reading more of his recent tweets/RTs.
https://twitter.com/ObsoleteDogma/status/807441914672934914
https://twitter.com/MattOrtega/status/807392564810829826
https://twitter.com/AJentleson/status/807456751998173184
ImpracticalPassword
Member
^^
That linked NYT article that was published after the WaPo article (corroborating their account*) is definitely worth reading. It adds a newer twist but also provides a decent summary of what is known so far.
*It's not clear to me if the NYT "senior administration official" is the same as the WaPo "senior US official". I doubt it though.
That linked NYT article that was published after the WaPo article (corroborating their account*) is definitely worth reading. It adds a newer twist but also provides a decent summary of what is known so far.
*It's not clear to me if the NYT "senior administration official" is the same as the WaPo "senior US official". I doubt it though.
Aaron Strife
Banned
I think there are more than a few moderate Rs (Collins, Murkowski etc) who are generally more supportive of LGBTQ rights and a few more establishment-minded Rs further who know not to kick that hornet's nest.
To the extent that there are policies made over the next 2-4 years that hurt the LGBTQ community it'll be more devious and underhanded than them passing a blatant anti-sodomy bill with Pence laughing maniacally and twirling his cartoon mustache.
Considering the previous knowledge of how the NYT regards itself, as well as how it shapes the narrative, I don't think it's too much of a reach.
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
hydragonwarrior
Member
Question: so with the majority in House and Senate, are Republicans simply free to pass whatever they want? Like an omnibus bill etc.
So what can the Dems do then? Do they have any power whatsoever in Congress or are they simply relegated to just sitting there and watching things happen without any say in the matter (like they can complain but that's all that'll happen - no ability to stop a bill or anything).
So what can the Dems do then? Do they have any power whatsoever in Congress or are they simply relegated to just sitting there and watching things happen without any say in the matter (like they can complain but that's all that'll happen - no ability to stop a bill or anything).
StopMakingSense
Member
Senate will have the filibuster still. Enough Senate R's probably worried about Turmp cratering the party during his administration to keep it from being nuked.
This has been virtually confirmed.
I think this is maybe too much. The tweet just says that they asked Reid, he said "yeah no it was linked to Trump," and then the NYT didn't print it. It doesn't actually say that Reid had evidence that he provided to the reporter.
SpaceCadetKeon
Banned
Here's something else I don't get: Putin acknowledges the dangers of climate change, and Russia is in on the Paris Agreement. Meanwhile, Trump vehemently denies climate change and wants to back out of the Paris Agreement. Unless they're absolutely confident they can sway Trump on the issue somehow, I don't understand how Russia can be comfortable with him in power.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
It's all about priorities.
Russia getting to exert control over neighboring countries > Delaying or reducing Climate Change.
Aaron Strife
Banned
I mean I'd say kos put it best: if Trump wants to say, restore the Voting Rights Act, or renominate Merrick Garland (who the fuck would Trump nominate who could break 60 votes assuming they keep the filibuster?) that's something I think the Democrats can work with him on. Stuff that I would expect out of say a hypothetical third Obama term.
But if you're talking about Trump carving up NAFTA to replace it invariably with something much worse, or working with him on some pissant infrastructure bill that does nothing and is essentially a big tax handout to companies that don't need it then just fuck it.
I actually don't think it's Trump that is making McConnell retain the filibuster. I think it's Ryan. Ryan's plans around social security and the welfare safety net are batshit insane, and electoral suicide, and McConnell know it. The senate wants nothing to do with a 'a better way' because they don't have gerrymandered districts and running on privatising medicare is not a winning platform in a lot of red states.
This is equally true for every single person who has empowered Trump, though, just with different issues.
Fundamentally, Trump is dumb. Intelligent but soulless people project onto him their personal agendas, and assume they'll be able to talk him out of the stuff they don't like.
The problem is that there are a lot of these people and they have contradictory agendas, and also that Trump is too dumb to stay convinced of anything except racism.
whyamihere
Banned
Dem nominee in 2020 better use two step authentication.
You mean the whole damn party going forward.
Right, but then whoever @StewSays is (apparently someone in McConnell's office?) says this was tantamount to Reid giving classified info to the NYT, which implies classified info confirming Reid's accusation exists.
Still, though, it seems like a reach.
Wow. Trump should be reaching out to the people who did not vote for him instead of bashing them or using them to brag about something.
- Status