EPTOn September 09 2025 00:20 WombaT wrote:
Isn’t part of the core problem that you effectively need the executive to overreach in the first place to get shit done in the first place?
It’s not a system built to function if two factions are just reflexively vetoing whatever the other puts forth, rather than the relative merits of a proposal.
If that becomes the lay of the land, then it becomes a subjective matter of if particular executive overreach is desirable or otherwise.
Show nested quote +
On September 08 2025 11:41 Introvert wrote:
No, I get it perfectly well. I think it's actually you and others who are now complaining who don't get it. I think this because the complaining is always one sided. If a Democrat here or elsewhere complained about a Democratic president's overreach ever it would be the first time. It should be a bipartisan issue. You don't need me to list all of Trump's boundary pushing, but there is not even a hint of disconcertion going the other way. That's why I'm focusing on this the way I am.
See, I doubt this. It would be completely out of character for Dems. I can't remember it ever happening here, even once. I am worried, but I am not going to play this game. I will not assume good faith on the part of Democrats wrt this issue. It has not been earned.
On September 07 2025 23:48 Billyboy wrote:
You are totally missing my point because you are so excited that now your team is getting them back but even harder. And you don't seem to realize that the next guy is going to do the same thing back, and then again. Until you no longer have a democracy. And people like you on both sides are going to be cheering and celebrating their guy the whole way.
This should be a bi partisan issue, the initiative is on the Republicans because they have the power. I'll be saying this to the Dems if they regain power. But like you they will likely want their pound of flesh and not notice the obvious to everyone outside the country derogation of democracy and open corruption.
On September 07 2025 13:47 Introvert wrote:
The final paragraph is exactly the thing I've been trying to tell people for years, it's part of what I as saying arguing about DACA all that time ago. I'm telling you that your warning, seemingly convenient now that it's a Republican pushing the boundaries, is falling on deaf ears because A) it's inconsistently applied, and B) there is the belief that when you win you get to govern. Is it ignoring the rules when playing Monopoly when one player has to pay double price for all properties? There is a deep imbalance within the government itself that Trump is now trying to blow up. There's a similar problem in the judiciary right now. People have to be allowed to govern when they win. Democrats don't have any problem with that, and when they get legislative pushback (i.e. immigration during Obama's term) or cheering from the media (high student loan forgiveness) they are supported in their novel uses of executive power. I'm just saying that maybe rather just looking forward with your new found insight you should apply it backwards as well and try to figure out how we got here. When that happens maybe your "hey guys maybe we should think about this" will be taken more seriously.
On September 06 2025 23:44 Billyboy wrote:
I guess I wasn't clear, I thought I was, I don't think the Dems never did this. What is new with Trump is the magnitude, frequency and so on. Did any president before Trump have this many court challenges, and losing them by his own parties judges, in this short of time? Of course not. Trump is trying to blow wide open the loop holes that other presidents snuck a couple things past.
You are never going to return, and really you shouldn't want to. You need to close the loop holes for everyone. Because well you feel really cool at sticking it to the libs right now, it is not going to feel great when it comes back. Progressive's are going to get their own populist version of Trump. And at some point during the back and forth the president is going to have all the power and then you will be fucked. And it won't much matter which team wins, because all the people lose in dictatorships 100% of the time, no matter their branding.
On September 05 2025 11:40 Introvert wrote:
That sentence was not directed at you explicitly, although you do go on to match it. You are being far too narrow and ignoring how we got here. In progressive land, we have a sudden reverence for constitutional norms or aversion to executive power that they've been living by. But of course this isn't true. First, recall what I said about the actual machinery of the state. Dems are just fine with a powerful coercive government, because most of the time they either control all of it or at least part of it. Who do you think argued for an expansive view of the civil rights laws this administration is now using to go after places like Harvard?
Or my favorite example: DACA. I remember arguing multiple times over the years about DACA with people here who insisted that it was ok and even good! because it was A) the "right thing to do" and B) that since Republicans wouldn't work with Obama on giving them citizenship, that it was ok for him to implement that program. I don't want to hear a single word about the Constitution or abusing norms from people who gave Obama a pass on DACA, who thought Biden trying to wipe out hundreds of billions of dollars of student loan debt with his pen was ok, or the people who cheered when a local NYC prosecutor went after Trump for paperwork that he claimed would change the election when it was impossible for it to have done so. Or when a president exercises the other great power he has: to not enforce the law. Like Biden did with the border for years. Now, Trump comes in to undo the first lawless action and once again everyone lights their hair in fire.
Just like with the Dobbs decision, what most Democrats mean by "Democracy" and "norms" is "we win" and facism is just when they lose. The different agencies of the federal government should have considered what they were doing when they try to impede Republican presidents from lawfully implementing their agendas. The thing is, slippery slopes are...slippery. Trump wins a nailbiter in 2016 and so many people are spun up into hysterics. How was that for the national temperature? Biden is elected by a similarly slim electoral college win and everyone, including Biden himself, thinks he was elected to re-make the world in his image. How did that work out?
I agree with you, we should all abide by the maxim that we should never take more power than we would give our enemies. Problem is, Democrats don't actually believe their enemies should ever be allowed to have power. And thus we are here. If one side wins by the rules but doesn't get to govern within them, then maybe next time they win they'll just ignore them all together? Sorry, I don't take this argument sincerely when it's only applied to Trump, when the same people yelping now spent the last 15 years arguing that the Constitution was a hopelessly flawed document tainted from the beginning by evil and thus should be given as little reference or reverence as possible.
Again, I have far more disdain for the people who thought that the power was theirs by right of being right. But unfortunately, the rain falls on the just and the unjust alike.
On September 05 2025 04:19 Billyboy wrote:
When did I do this?
But also lets not keep with the false equivalence. I'm going to use golf as an analogy because people lose their perspective when we talk about policy. Trump often complained about Obamas golfing how he shouldn't have time and the cost. Now Trump golfs 25x as often, and he does at his own courses and the staff stay at his hotels, so he is massively profiting personally from Tax payer dollars. So well it is technically true that both Obama and Trump golfed during their presidency, the frequency, personal benefits and costs to the american people are not at all equal.
The same is true with how Trump is running his presidency, and I guess you like that. But will you like it when president AOC stacks the supreme court and does whatever she damn well pleases completely ignoring what little rules, checks and balances your system apparently has? Because the door is now open.
What I'm asking is that all Americans no matter what team you were born on and have supported no matter how stupid or awful they are, start thinking, hmmm do I want the other side to be able to do this? All of you really need to take a stern look at the rules and concentrate on making them actually sensible and fair. If you think the other side can't have their own maniac populist who ignores all the norms and fucks up your democracy and country you are very naïve. Do you really want to bet your democracy on "your" side winning? And when that has happened in countries has that ever worked out well for the people? Left or right?
On September 04 2025 13:40 Introvert wrote:
This idea is funny because the saying I've quoted before is still true, "Republicans act like they will never have power and Democrats act like they will never lose it." I remember in younger days Dems didn't pretend to have so much reverence for the Constitution, in ye olden days they were justifying why Obama had to do X Y Z with his "pen and his phone" because Republicans wouldn't work him. Democrats control the actual machinery of the state at the personnel level. it's why "Dear Colleague letters" never got a hyperventilating reaction when Democrat administrations use them. Because all the dems on power agree with them. Your rule is one I've advocated for quite often, but don't pretend this attitude started with Trump. Trump is a reaction, an escalation. Gee, I wonder where he learned things like using the law to go after his opponents? A real mystery. And now we are here, because one side refused to give up their monopoly on the way government works and the other side stopped caring.
I have far more contempt for the people who had the power and refused to let democracy take it from them.
There is only one thing that will change where we are. A crisis of some sort, when everything hangs in the balance and compromises must be made. More and more I think it has to get worse before it gets better. Congress will have to be where things change, but they won't do it willingly.
On September 04 2025 10:47 Billyboy wrote:
People should use the rule when it comes to democracy, do I think the other side should be able to do this when they are in power, or do I think they should have to follow rule X Y Z. That alone would make US politics so much more sensible instead of this speed run to the bottom.
People should use the rule when it comes to democracy, do I think the other side should be able to do this when they are in power, or do I think they should have to follow rule X Y Z. That alone would make US politics so much more sensible instead of this speed run to the bottom.
This idea is funny because the saying I've quoted before is still true, "Republicans act like they will never have power and Democrats act like they will never lose it." I remember in younger days Dems didn't pretend to have so much reverence for the Constitution, in ye olden days they were justifying why Obama had to do X Y Z with his "pen and his phone" because Republicans wouldn't work him. Democrats control the actual machinery of the state at the personnel level. it's why "Dear Colleague letters" never got a hyperventilating reaction when Democrat administrations use them. Because all the dems on power agree with them. Your rule is one I've advocated for quite often, but don't pretend this attitude started with Trump. Trump is a reaction, an escalation. Gee, I wonder where he learned things like using the law to go after his opponents? A real mystery. And now we are here, because one side refused to give up their monopoly on the way government works and the other side stopped caring.
I have far more contempt for the people who had the power and refused to let democracy take it from them.
There is only one thing that will change where we are. A crisis of some sort, when everything hangs in the balance and compromises must be made. More and more I think it has to get worse before it gets better. Congress will have to be where things change, but they won't do it willingly.
When did I do this?
But also lets not keep with the false equivalence. I'm going to use golf as an analogy because people lose their perspective when we talk about policy. Trump often complained about Obamas golfing how he shouldn't have time and the cost. Now Trump golfs 25x as often, and he does at his own courses and the staff stay at his hotels, so he is massively profiting personally from Tax payer dollars. So well it is technically true that both Obama and Trump golfed during their presidency, the frequency, personal benefits and costs to the american people are not at all equal.
The same is true with how Trump is running his presidency, and I guess you like that. But will you like it when president AOC stacks the supreme court and does whatever she damn well pleases completely ignoring what little rules, checks and balances your system apparently has? Because the door is now open.
What I'm asking is that all Americans no matter what team you were born on and have supported no matter how stupid or awful they are, start thinking, hmmm do I want the other side to be able to do this? All of you really need to take a stern look at the rules and concentrate on making them actually sensible and fair. If you think the other side can't have their own maniac populist who ignores all the norms and fucks up your democracy and country you are very naïve. Do you really want to bet your democracy on "your" side winning? And when that has happened in countries has that ever worked out well for the people? Left or right?
That sentence was not directed at you explicitly, although you do go on to match it. You are being far too narrow and ignoring how we got here. In progressive land, we have a sudden reverence for constitutional norms or aversion to executive power that they've been living by. But of course this isn't true. First, recall what I said about the actual machinery of the state. Dems are just fine with a powerful coercive government, because most of the time they either control all of it or at least part of it. Who do you think argued for an expansive view of the civil rights laws this administration is now using to go after places like Harvard?
Or my favorite example: DACA. I remember arguing multiple times over the years about DACA with people here who insisted that it was ok and even good! because it was A) the "right thing to do" and B) that since Republicans wouldn't work with Obama on giving them citizenship, that it was ok for him to implement that program. I don't want to hear a single word about the Constitution or abusing norms from people who gave Obama a pass on DACA, who thought Biden trying to wipe out hundreds of billions of dollars of student loan debt with his pen was ok, or the people who cheered when a local NYC prosecutor went after Trump for paperwork that he claimed would change the election when it was impossible for it to have done so. Or when a president exercises the other great power he has: to not enforce the law. Like Biden did with the border for years. Now, Trump comes in to undo the first lawless action and once again everyone lights their hair in fire.
Just like with the Dobbs decision, what most Democrats mean by "Democracy" and "norms" is "we win" and facism is just when they lose. The different agencies of the federal government should have considered what they were doing when they try to impede Republican presidents from lawfully implementing their agendas. The thing is, slippery slopes are...slippery. Trump wins a nailbiter in 2016 and so many people are spun up into hysterics. How was that for the national temperature? Biden is elected by a similarly slim electoral college win and everyone, including Biden himself, thinks he was elected to re-make the world in his image. How did that work out?
I agree with you, we should all abide by the maxim that we should never take more power than we would give our enemies. Problem is, Democrats don't actually believe their enemies should ever be allowed to have power. And thus we are here. If one side wins by the rules but doesn't get to govern within them, then maybe next time they win they'll just ignore them all together? Sorry, I don't take this argument sincerely when it's only applied to Trump, when the same people yelping now spent the last 15 years arguing that the Constitution was a hopelessly flawed document tainted from the beginning by evil and thus should be given as little reference or reverence as possible.
Again, I have far more disdain for the people who thought that the power was theirs by right of being right. But unfortunately, the rain falls on the just and the unjust alike.
I guess I wasn't clear, I thought I was, I don't think the Dems never did this. What is new with Trump is the magnitude, frequency and so on. Did any president before Trump have this many court challenges, and losing them by his own parties judges, in this short of time? Of course not. Trump is trying to blow wide open the loop holes that other presidents snuck a couple things past.
You are never going to return, and really you shouldn't want to. You need to close the loop holes for everyone. Because well you feel really cool at sticking it to the libs right now, it is not going to feel great when it comes back. Progressive's are going to get their own populist version of Trump. And at some point during the back and forth the president is going to have all the power and then you will be fucked. And it won't much matter which team wins, because all the people lose in dictatorships 100% of the time, no matter their branding.
The final paragraph is exactly the thing I've been trying to tell people for years, it's part of what I as saying arguing about DACA all that time ago. I'm telling you that your warning, seemingly convenient now that it's a Republican pushing the boundaries, is falling on deaf ears because A) it's inconsistently applied, and B) there is the belief that when you win you get to govern. Is it ignoring the rules when playing Monopoly when one player has to pay double price for all properties? There is a deep imbalance within the government itself that Trump is now trying to blow up. There's a similar problem in the judiciary right now. People have to be allowed to govern when they win. Democrats don't have any problem with that, and when they get legislative pushback (i.e. immigration during Obama's term) or cheering from the media (high student loan forgiveness) they are supported in their novel uses of executive power. I'm just saying that maybe rather just looking forward with your new found insight you should apply it backwards as well and try to figure out how we got here. When that happens maybe your "hey guys maybe we should think about this" will be taken more seriously.
You are totally missing my point because you are so excited that now your team is getting them back but even harder. And you don't seem to realize that the next guy is going to do the same thing back, and then again. Until you no longer have a democracy. And people like you on both sides are going to be cheering and celebrating their guy the whole way.
This should be a bi partisan issue, the initiative is on the Republicans because they have the power. I'll be saying this to the Dems if they regain power. But like you they will likely want their pound of flesh and not notice the obvious to everyone outside the country derogation of democracy and open corruption.
No, I get it perfectly well. I think it's actually you and others who are now complaining who don't get it. I think this because the complaining is always one sided. If a Democrat here or elsewhere complained about a Democratic president's overreach ever it would be the first time. It should be a bipartisan issue. You don't need me to list all of Trump's boundary pushing, but there is not even a hint of disconcertion going the other way. That's why I'm focusing on this the way I am.
I'll be saying this to the Dems if they regain power.
See, I doubt this. It would be completely out of character for Dems. I can't remember it ever happening here, even once. I am worried, but I am not going to play this game. I will not assume good faith on the part of Democrats wrt this issue. It has not been earned.
Isn’t part of the core problem that you effectively need the executive to overreach in the first place to get shit done in the first place?
It’s not a system built to function if two factions are just reflexively vetoing whatever the other puts forth, rather than the relative merits of a proposal.
If that becomes the lay of the land, then it becomes a subjective matter of if particular executive overreach is desirable or otherwise.
This was exactly the stance I was having to argue against during the Obama years.
On September 09 2025 05:10 Billyboy wrote:
I'm not much for sticking to party lines, but I guess time will tell.
Your last paragraph is exactly what I'm talking about, and is absolutely going to go the other way. The most angry guy with the best grievance politics is going to really get those Reps. It is going to be hard to top the sheer stupidity and waste, but they will try damn hard. I really doubt you are going to a get a return to normal Dem President, your people do not want that, it is something Reps and Dems currently have in common.
Show nested quote +
On September 08 2025 11:41 Introvert wrote:
No, I get it perfectly well. I think it's actually you and others who are now complaining who don't get it. I think this because the complaining is always one sided. If a Democrat here or elsewhere complained about a Democratic president's overreach ever it would be the first time. It should be a bipartisan issue. You don't need me to list all of Trump's boundary pushing, but there is not even a hint of disconcertion going the other way. That's why I'm focusing on this the way I am.
See, I doubt this. It would be completely out of character for Dems. I can't remember it ever happening here, even once. I am worried, but I am not going to play this game. I will not assume good faith on the part of Democrats wrt this issue. It has not been earned.
On September 07 2025 23:48 Billyboy wrote:
You are totally missing my point because you are so excited that now your team is getting them back but even harder. And you don't seem to realize that the next guy is going to do the same thing back, and then again. Until you no longer have a democracy. And people like you on both sides are going to be cheering and celebrating their guy the whole way.
This should be a bi partisan issue, the initiative is on the Republicans because they have the power. I'll be saying this to the Dems if they regain power. But like you they will likely want their pound of flesh and not notice the obvious to everyone outside the country derogation of democracy and open corruption.
On September 07 2025 13:47 Introvert wrote:
The final paragraph is exactly the thing I've been trying to tell people for years, it's part of what I as saying arguing about DACA all that time ago. I'm telling you that your warning, seemingly convenient now that it's a Republican pushing the boundaries, is falling on deaf ears because A) it's inconsistently applied, and B) there is the belief that when you win you get to govern. Is it ignoring the rules when playing Monopoly when one player has to pay double price for all properties? There is a deep imbalance within the government itself that Trump is now trying to blow up. There's a similar problem in the judiciary right now. People have to be allowed to govern when they win. Democrats don't have any problem with that, and when they get legislative pushback (i.e. immigration during Obama's term) or cheering from the media (high student loan forgiveness) they are supported in their novel uses of executive power. I'm just saying that maybe rather just looking forward with your new found insight you should apply it backwards as well and try to figure out how we got here. When that happens maybe your "hey guys maybe we should think about this" will be taken more seriously.
On September 06 2025 23:44 Billyboy wrote:
I guess I wasn't clear, I thought I was, I don't think the Dems never did this. What is new with Trump is the magnitude, frequency and so on. Did any president before Trump have this many court challenges, and losing them by his own parties judges, in this short of time? Of course not. Trump is trying to blow wide open the loop holes that other presidents snuck a couple things past.
You are never going to return, and really you shouldn't want to. You need to close the loop holes for everyone. Because well you feel really cool at sticking it to the libs right now, it is not going to feel great when it comes back. Progressive's are going to get their own populist version of Trump. And at some point during the back and forth the president is going to have all the power and then you will be fucked. And it won't much matter which team wins, because all the people lose in dictatorships 100% of the time, no matter their branding.
On September 05 2025 11:40 Introvert wrote:
That sentence was not directed at you explicitly, although you do go on to match it. You are being far too narrow and ignoring how we got here. In progressive land, we have a sudden reverence for constitutional norms or aversion to executive power that they've been living by. But of course this isn't true. First, recall what I said about the actual machinery of the state. Dems are just fine with a powerful coercive government, because most of the time they either control all of it or at least part of it. Who do you think argued for an expansive view of the civil rights laws this administration is now using to go after places like Harvard?
Or my favorite example: DACA. I remember arguing multiple times over the years about DACA with people here who insisted that it was ok and even good! because it was A) the "right thing to do" and B) that since Republicans wouldn't work with Obama on giving them citizenship, that it was ok for him to implement that program. I don't want to hear a single word about the Constitution or abusing norms from people who gave Obama a pass on DACA, who thought Biden trying to wipe out hundreds of billions of dollars of student loan debt with his pen was ok, or the people who cheered when a local NYC prosecutor went after Trump for paperwork that he claimed would change the election when it was impossible for it to have done so. Or when a president exercises the other great power he has: to not enforce the law. Like Biden did with the border for years. Now, Trump comes in to undo the first lawless action and once again everyone lights their hair in fire.
Just like with the Dobbs decision, what most Democrats mean by "Democracy" and "norms" is "we win" and facism is just when they lose. The different agencies of the federal government should have considered what they were doing when they try to impede Republican presidents from lawfully implementing their agendas. The thing is, slippery slopes are...slippery. Trump wins a nailbiter in 2016 and so many people are spun up into hysterics. How was that for the national temperature? Biden is elected by a similarly slim electoral college win and everyone, including Biden himself, thinks he was elected to re-make the world in his image. How did that work out?
I agree with you, we should all abide by the maxim that we should never take more power than we would give our enemies. Problem is, Democrats don't actually believe their enemies should ever be allowed to have power. And thus we are here. If one side wins by the rules but doesn't get to govern within them, then maybe next time they win they'll just ignore them all together? Sorry, I don't take this argument sincerely when it's only applied to Trump, when the same people yelping now spent the last 15 years arguing that the Constitution was a hopelessly flawed document tainted from the beginning by evil and thus should be given as little reference or reverence as possible.
Again, I have far more disdain for the people who thought that the power was theirs by right of being right. But unfortunately, the rain falls on the just and the unjust alike.
On September 05 2025 04:19 Billyboy wrote:
When did I do this?
But also lets not keep with the false equivalence. I'm going to use golf as an analogy because people lose their perspective when we talk about policy. Trump often complained about Obamas golfing how he shouldn't have time and the cost. Now Trump golfs 25x as often, and he does at his own courses and the staff stay at his hotels, so he is massively profiting personally from Tax payer dollars. So well it is technically true that both Obama and Trump golfed during their presidency, the frequency, personal benefits and costs to the american people are not at all equal.
The same is true with how Trump is running his presidency, and I guess you like that. But will you like it when president AOC stacks the supreme court and does whatever she damn well pleases completely ignoring what little rules, checks and balances your system apparently has? Because the door is now open.
What I'm asking is that all Americans no matter what team you were born on and have supported no matter how stupid or awful they are, start thinking, hmmm do I want the other side to be able to do this? All of you really need to take a stern look at the rules and concentrate on making them actually sensible and fair. If you think the other side can't have their own maniac populist who ignores all the norms and fucks up your democracy and country you are very naïve. Do you really want to bet your democracy on "your" side winning? And when that has happened in countries has that ever worked out well for the people? Left or right?
On September 04 2025 13:40 Introvert wrote:
This idea is funny because the saying I've quoted before is still true, "Republicans act like they will never have power and Democrats act like they will never lose it." I remember in younger days Dems didn't pretend to have so much reverence for the Constitution, in ye olden days they were justifying why Obama had to do X Y Z with his "pen and his phone" because Republicans wouldn't work him. Democrats control the actual machinery of the state at the personnel level. it's why "Dear Colleague letters" never got a hyperventilating reaction when Democrat administrations use them. Because all the dems on power agree with them. Your rule is one I've advocated for quite often, but don't pretend this attitude started with Trump. Trump is a reaction, an escalation. Gee, I wonder where he learned things like using the law to go after his opponents? A real mystery. And now we are here, because one side refused to give up their monopoly on the way government works and the other side stopped caring.
I have far more contempt for the people who had the power and refused to let democracy take it from them.
There is only one thing that will change where we are. A crisis of some sort, when everything hangs in the balance and compromises must be made. More and more I think it has to get worse before it gets better. Congress will have to be where things change, but they won't do it willingly.
On September 04 2025 10:47 Billyboy wrote:
People should use the rule when it comes to democracy, do I think the other side should be able to do this when they are in power, or do I think they should have to follow rule X Y Z. That alone would make US politics so much more sensible instead of this speed run to the bottom.
People should use the rule when it comes to democracy, do I think the other side should be able to do this when they are in power, or do I think they should have to follow rule X Y Z. That alone would make US politics so much more sensible instead of this speed run to the bottom.
This idea is funny because the saying I've quoted before is still true, "Republicans act like they will never have power and Democrats act like they will never lose it." I remember in younger days Dems didn't pretend to have so much reverence for the Constitution, in ye olden days they were justifying why Obama had to do X Y Z with his "pen and his phone" because Republicans wouldn't work him. Democrats control the actual machinery of the state at the personnel level. it's why "Dear Colleague letters" never got a hyperventilating reaction when Democrat administrations use them. Because all the dems on power agree with them. Your rule is one I've advocated for quite often, but don't pretend this attitude started with Trump. Trump is a reaction, an escalation. Gee, I wonder where he learned things like using the law to go after his opponents? A real mystery. And now we are here, because one side refused to give up their monopoly on the way government works and the other side stopped caring.
I have far more contempt for the people who had the power and refused to let democracy take it from them.
There is only one thing that will change where we are. A crisis of some sort, when everything hangs in the balance and compromises must be made. More and more I think it has to get worse before it gets better. Congress will have to be where things change, but they won't do it willingly.
When did I do this?
But also lets not keep with the false equivalence. I'm going to use golf as an analogy because people lose their perspective when we talk about policy. Trump often complained about Obamas golfing how he shouldn't have time and the cost. Now Trump golfs 25x as often, and he does at his own courses and the staff stay at his hotels, so he is massively profiting personally from Tax payer dollars. So well it is technically true that both Obama and Trump golfed during their presidency, the frequency, personal benefits and costs to the american people are not at all equal.
The same is true with how Trump is running his presidency, and I guess you like that. But will you like it when president AOC stacks the supreme court and does whatever she damn well pleases completely ignoring what little rules, checks and balances your system apparently has? Because the door is now open.
What I'm asking is that all Americans no matter what team you were born on and have supported no matter how stupid or awful they are, start thinking, hmmm do I want the other side to be able to do this? All of you really need to take a stern look at the rules and concentrate on making them actually sensible and fair. If you think the other side can't have their own maniac populist who ignores all the norms and fucks up your democracy and country you are very naïve. Do you really want to bet your democracy on "your" side winning? And when that has happened in countries has that ever worked out well for the people? Left or right?
That sentence was not directed at you explicitly, although you do go on to match it. You are being far too narrow and ignoring how we got here. In progressive land, we have a sudden reverence for constitutional norms or aversion to executive power that they've been living by. But of course this isn't true. First, recall what I said about the actual machinery of the state. Dems are just fine with a powerful coercive government, because most of the time they either control all of it or at least part of it. Who do you think argued for an expansive view of the civil rights laws this administration is now using to go after places like Harvard?
Or my favorite example: DACA. I remember arguing multiple times over the years about DACA with people here who insisted that it was ok and even good! because it was A) the "right thing to do" and B) that since Republicans wouldn't work with Obama on giving them citizenship, that it was ok for him to implement that program. I don't want to hear a single word about the Constitution or abusing norms from people who gave Obama a pass on DACA, who thought Biden trying to wipe out hundreds of billions of dollars of student loan debt with his pen was ok, or the people who cheered when a local NYC prosecutor went after Trump for paperwork that he claimed would change the election when it was impossible for it to have done so. Or when a president exercises the other great power he has: to not enforce the law. Like Biden did with the border for years. Now, Trump comes in to undo the first lawless action and once again everyone lights their hair in fire.
Just like with the Dobbs decision, what most Democrats mean by "Democracy" and "norms" is "we win" and facism is just when they lose. The different agencies of the federal government should have considered what they were doing when they try to impede Republican presidents from lawfully implementing their agendas. The thing is, slippery slopes are...slippery. Trump wins a nailbiter in 2016 and so many people are spun up into hysterics. How was that for the national temperature? Biden is elected by a similarly slim electoral college win and everyone, including Biden himself, thinks he was elected to re-make the world in his image. How did that work out?
I agree with you, we should all abide by the maxim that we should never take more power than we would give our enemies. Problem is, Democrats don't actually believe their enemies should ever be allowed to have power. And thus we are here. If one side wins by the rules but doesn't get to govern within them, then maybe next time they win they'll just ignore them all together? Sorry, I don't take this argument sincerely when it's only applied to Trump, when the same people yelping now spent the last 15 years arguing that the Constitution was a hopelessly flawed document tainted from the beginning by evil and thus should be given as little reference or reverence as possible.
Again, I have far more disdain for the people who thought that the power was theirs by right of being right. But unfortunately, the rain falls on the just and the unjust alike.
I guess I wasn't clear, I thought I was, I don't think the Dems never did this. What is new with Trump is the magnitude, frequency and so on. Did any president before Trump have this many court challenges, and losing them by his own parties judges, in this short of time? Of course not. Trump is trying to blow wide open the loop holes that other presidents snuck a couple things past.
You are never going to return, and really you shouldn't want to. You need to close the loop holes for everyone. Because well you feel really cool at sticking it to the libs right now, it is not going to feel great when it comes back. Progressive's are going to get their own populist version of Trump. And at some point during the back and forth the president is going to have all the power and then you will be fucked. And it won't much matter which team wins, because all the people lose in dictatorships 100% of the time, no matter their branding.
The final paragraph is exactly the thing I've been trying to tell people for years, it's part of what I as saying arguing about DACA all that time ago. I'm telling you that your warning, seemingly convenient now that it's a Republican pushing the boundaries, is falling on deaf ears because A) it's inconsistently applied, and B) there is the belief that when you win you get to govern. Is it ignoring the rules when playing Monopoly when one player has to pay double price for all properties? There is a deep imbalance within the government itself that Trump is now trying to blow up. There's a similar problem in the judiciary right now. People have to be allowed to govern when they win. Democrats don't have any problem with that, and when they get legislative pushback (i.e. immigration during Obama's term) or cheering from the media (high student loan forgiveness) they are supported in their novel uses of executive power. I'm just saying that maybe rather just looking forward with your new found insight you should apply it backwards as well and try to figure out how we got here. When that happens maybe your "hey guys maybe we should think about this" will be taken more seriously.
You are totally missing my point because you are so excited that now your team is getting them back but even harder. And you don't seem to realize that the next guy is going to do the same thing back, and then again. Until you no longer have a democracy. And people like you on both sides are going to be cheering and celebrating their guy the whole way.
This should be a bi partisan issue, the initiative is on the Republicans because they have the power. I'll be saying this to the Dems if they regain power. But like you they will likely want their pound of flesh and not notice the obvious to everyone outside the country derogation of democracy and open corruption.
No, I get it perfectly well. I think it's actually you and others who are now complaining who don't get it. I think this because the complaining is always one sided. If a Democrat here or elsewhere complained about a Democratic president's overreach ever it would be the first time. It should be a bipartisan issue. You don't need me to list all of Trump's boundary pushing, but there is not even a hint of disconcertion going the other way. That's why I'm focusing on this the way I am.
I'll be saying this to the Dems if they regain power.
See, I doubt this. It would be completely out of character for Dems. I can't remember it ever happening here, even once. I am worried, but I am not going to play this game. I will not assume good faith on the part of Democrats wrt this issue. It has not been earned.
I'm not much for sticking to party lines, but I guess time will tell.
Your last paragraph is exactly what I'm talking about, and is absolutely going to go the other way. The most angry guy with the best grievance politics is going to really get those Reps. It is going to be hard to top the sheer stupidity and waste, but they will try damn hard. I really doubt you are going to a get a return to normal Dem President, your people do not want that, it is something Reps and Dems currently have in common.
I think a lot of Trump people view it like this+ Show Spoiler +
I guess we are winding down here but I'm glad you used the bolded phrase. My goal here has been to point out that these executive actions pushing the boundaries *are* a part of a "normal Dem presiden[cies]." It's the unwillingness to acknowledge this that makes me suspect that your warning will go unheeded. Now I can't know why people refuse to see this, but certainly for many it must be that they don't actually oppose the president having all this power, instead they look wistfully back when it was used in ways they like.
So until Congress gets its act back together, this shall continue.
