Anna Paulina Luna, another fabricated House freshman biography

The voters have the power to change that. They aren't using that power.

 

Maybe there is nothing that could be done differently, but what does it say that something that is widely supported can't even get a vote (even when one party controls the government)? Doesn't tell me we live in a very democratic system. The US Constitution is designed to suppress that kind of popular will and democratic sentiment, and it succeeds again and again.

 

I agree with you here.

 

The NEW political paradigm of the Republican Party.
Taking LYING to another level.

 

A lot of people think that nothing ever seems to get done and so they tune it out and don't bother to vote. That's a winning argument for Republicans, who actually don't want anything to get done that would actually help people. It plays right into their hands.

The idea that both sides, Dems and Repubs, are equally bad, or that neither side actually cares about the average person on the street, is really destructive and self-defeating. It's a total false equivalency.

 

The way I see it is that Dems have set a sort of trap for themselves. They are the party of good government, but also the party of rules and norms and stuff. Thats all well and good when norms and rules can deliver good governance and improve people's day to day, but basically they dont anymore (if they ever did, but its more obvious now). The system runs on procedural warfare, legalistic power grabs, rule flaunting and the problem for Dems is that if they overstep all their rhetoric about devotion to rules and norms to deliver good governance they will basically be called anti-democratic, authoritarian, hypocritical etc. Some might say this is exactly what the Democrats want, they get to avoid using power, something they are afraid to do compared to Republicans like DeSantis who rightfully are called authoritarian in nature. But people respond to that and say he's a guy who can actually do things too. Especially when compared to a person who is like "well I'd like to give you healthcare, but well there is this made up rule called the filibuster." What if it requires becoming authoritarian to save democracy? I think its probably does, or at least doing things that will be called "authoritarian" but will have some popular backing that would be required to be considered legitimate.

 

The dam broke. There is no expectation of honesty from the Republican electorate because, you know, libs want to destroy America.

 

I read the Bagley article involved here, and it definitely informed my thinking

 

DeSantis has an absolute supermajority in the state congress that is aligned with basically all of his policy priorities.

And due to gerrymandering, neither DeSantis nor the state congress have any incentive to moderate or play by the rules. Just the opposite, they are far better off politically by going as extreme as possible to reduce their only potential threat profile (a primary from the right).

In that kind of environment, it's easy to get stuff done, even/especially authoritarian stuff.

DC is a completely different dynamic. Biden can't kill the filibuster because he doesn't have the votes. Full stop. That's not an issue DeSantis would ever face in Florida, but certainly one he would if he became prez. His authoritarian desires notwithstanding.

 

Voters are lazy. Perhaps the founders knew this when they wrote the Constitution. Maybe voters shouldn't get to choose their Senators. Maybe voters shouldn't get to elect the President. Maybe we should be a little more parliamentarian in our governance.

 

Its not about having votes necessarily, I dont even mean that really. Is there a Democrat that would be willing to ignore a supreme court ruling or even say that judicial review is unconstitutional to marginalize the court system? Declare the debt ceiling unconstitutional? (maybe that could happen) These are the kind of things I'm talking about, legalistic maneuvers or rule interpretation to use power to achieve things that will make it easier for Dems to get the necessary votes or legitimacy to do big things, or at the very least diffuse or quash the sort of self-inflicted or intentional rolling crises that define Constitutional government in 2023.

 

Probably going to uncover more and more of this with the ease of background searches today. Might put a stop to it.

 

I think most democrats understand that ignoring a supreme court ruling is a bad long-term play, because it opens the door for states to ignore court rulings as well.

And as the feds enforce most important things through the court system, it becomes a self-defeating strategy.

 

Serious question, are you enrolled in the Civics Seal of Excellence program?

 

Well yes, in the long term we're all dead, so I go back to my point about the Democrats not delivering on things in the short term or using this type of thinking as an excuse for inaction. At some point though the rhetoric that democracy is in danger and the Republicans are a threat but you cant do anything about it because we need to think long term is untenable. You are going to create the conditions for the person who is going to do the authoritarian-type actions needed to "save" or "kill" democracy.

 

Look, you're not wrong that the party needs to grow a pair on some of these things, including the debt ceiling. I'm doubtful Biden is the guy to do that.

 

No I am not. I don’t believe I’ll ever see a dime of the stipend.

If you’re worried about my opinions and my students, I am a professional. I don’t even give my opinion when asked. That is not my job.

In response to what I said above about the election of Senators and Presidents, I leave a quote from Winston Churchill:
“The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.”

With that, I am out.

 

I was just curious if you were, no need to get huffy. Some people I know are doing it and I was just curious if you were doing it.

Edit to add: curious why you think a parliamentary system would any different? That system gave the UK Brexit.