undefined | Better HN

0 pointsocdtrekkie20d ago0 comments

I suspect in the aftermath of this administration, the power of the President as a whole is going to be massively stripped back.

0 comments

oatmeal120d ago

Has not happened after other catastrophic administrations. Each party likes the power when they get hold of it.

ocdtrekkieOP20d ago

Congresscritters like personal power. Trump has neutered even his own party's legislators and they do not like it, even if they fall in line out of fear. Keep in mind even when Trump is in power, his own party goes through processes like "pro forma" sessions which prevent him from making recess appointments.

gruez20d ago

That seems highly questionable given how little pushback Trump got in congress, and it was almost entirely along party lines. What makes you think they'll suddenly grow a spine in 3 years?

sofixa20d ago

They're probably counting on the majority of the current Congress losing their seats over this.

ocdtrekkieOP20d ago

The issue is people are afraid of him. There was plenty of Republican opposition to Trump but people either fell in line or got pushed out. (The main problem is that people didn't have the courage to oppose him all at once, he can easily handle one threat at a time.)

I suspect even of Republicans voting in the lines today, they don't like him or his behavior but are too self-interested to do anything about it. When a new administration comes in, between Republicans happy to avoid a Democrat or one of their own have that power again, and Democrats ready to ensure another Trump can never happen again, we'll have bipartisan support for crippling presidential power.

3eb7988a166320d ago

There are plenty of rules in place today which say the President cannot do X thing. I do not see how adding rules to the book changes anything if the Congressional/judicial enforcement becomes so impotent to use the tools at their disposal.

arjie20d ago

I think it'll be interesting to see what the consequences are. In India, it used to be (I haven't lived there in decades) pretty par for the course for a new party to come into power and jail all the previous party's heads for corruption and then when it yoyos over the inverse would happen. That would be a worse outcome for the US, I think. It would stall any significant action from the government.

ocdtrekkieOP20d ago

I think we allowed a sense of decorum and a hope we could just "move on" to avoid that happening in 2021, and now we are suffering the wrath of not doing it. I suspect we will not make the same mistake in 2029.

1 more reply

simonw20d ago

I thought that would happen after the first Trump term. It did not.

The second one has made an even stronger case for doing so though.

nailer20d ago

That might work out well for the Republicans - "rule by executive order" started under the Obama administration.

jamroom20d ago

Based on this:

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/executive-or...

Looks like it really started under Teddy Roosevelt. Obama's 276 is lower than most of his predecessors.

jyounker20d ago

I suggest that you actually look up the numbers for other presidents: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/executive-or...

nailer20d ago

You're right. I repeated something I'd heard elsewhere and it wasn't correct.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

oatmeal120d ago

Has not happened after other catastrophic administrations. Each party likes the power when they get hold of it.

ocdtrekkieOP20d ago

gruez20d ago

That seems highly questionable given how little pushback Trump got in congress, and it was almost entirely along party lines. What makes you think they'll suddenly grow a spine in 3 years?

sofixa20d ago

They're probably counting on the majority of the current Congress losing their seats over this.

ocdtrekkieOP20d ago

3eb7988a166320d ago

arjie20d ago

ocdtrekkieOP20d ago

1 more reply

simonw20d ago

I thought that would happen after the first Trump term. It did not.

The second one has made an even stronger case for doing so though.

nailer20d ago

That might work out well for the Republicans - "rule by executive order" started under the Obama administration.

jamroom20d ago

Based on this:

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/executive-or...

Looks like it really started under Teddy Roosevelt. Obama's 276 is lower than most of his predecessors.

jyounker20d ago

I suggest that you actually look up the numbers for other presidents: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/executive-or...

nailer20d ago

You're right. I repeated something I'd heard elsewhere and it wasn't correct.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse