5 ms·

Unfortunately, the question of how much authority the office has depends on which party currently occupies the office and who's asking.

toomuchtodo 7y ago
Which is why it's important to craft policy of strong checks and balances, regardless of which party has a majority. Today you're the Rebellion, tomorrow you're the Empire. Design systems resilient to subversion or tyranny by anyone.
xamuel 7y ago
Yes, I've noticed this too: whenever the party I favor is in office, the office is a lame duck, unable to lift a finger without Congressional approval. Whenever the enemy party is in office, they're absolute tyrants answerable to no-one. This sure is convenient, as it saves me from all kinds of cognitive dissonance!
- TallGuyShort 7y ago
  Uncanny. Do you also find that the morality of a war keeps switching for you?
sehugg 7y ago
Whether or not the occupant has just been impeached for leveraging public assets against political enemies seems to also be a relevant factor.
- TallGuyShort 7y ago
  Even that seems to 100% be prior party lines anyway.
  - bduerst 7y ago
    >Even that seems to 100% be prior party lines anyway. The non-partisan GAO seems to disagree: https://apnews.com/9127109f325778490fd40c5f98be1817 https://apnews.com/9127109f325778490fd40c5f98be1817
    - TallGuyShort 7y ago
      That's somewhat irrelevant to the question of what people's opinions are of the power the president should have though, isn't it. I'm not defending Trump, I'm saying that D's are currently arguing he shouldn't have power that they would be happy to see exercised if it wasn't an R in office.
      - bduerst 7y ago
        Sure, if this had precedence. Would you say illegal actions taken by the president are relevant to whether they should continue to have power? This is the question that non-partisan people are considering.
        TallGuyShort 7y ago
        >> Would you say illegal actions taken by the president are relevant to whether they should continue to have power? Absolutely and immediately, once convicted, but that hasn't happened. And to emphasize my point about party lines - how much do you want to bet it won't happen? But let's be clear that my first comment was tongue-in-cheek. I'm not saying the president ACTUALLY has more power depending on the party. I'm saying that things people were fine with under Obama are suddenly a problem under Trump. And I will expect the same thing next time there's a Democrat in office - suddenly Republicans will flip-flop on the way the office is supposed to operate. edit: Maybe a more appropriate question is, among people who label themselves as "Democrat" and "Republican", who thinks that Trump should lose power after his impeachment, who also thinks that Clinton should have lost power after his impeachment?
        shadowgovt 7y ago
        It's a bit of an apples to oranges comparison since one of them was impeached for lying to a grand jury (about a topic that was outside the scope of the investigation and more than a little irrelevant to any questions of high crimes and misdemeanors) and another was impeached for abuse of the power of his office to solicit aid from a foreign country in collecting damaging information on a political rival. Intent and outcomes matter if the question is "Should this person lose power?"

toomuchtodo 7y ago

Which is why it's important to craft policy of strong checks and balances, regardless of which party has a majority. Today you're the Rebellion, tomorrow you're the Empire. Design systems resilient to subversion or tyranny by anyone.

xamuel 7y ago

Yes, I've noticed this too: whenever the party I favor is in office, the office is a lame duck, unable to lift a finger without Congressional approval. Whenever the enemy party is in office, they're absolute tyrants answerable to no-one. This sure is convenient, as it saves me from all kinds of cognitive dissonance!

TallGuyShort 7y ago
Uncanny. Do you also find that the morality of a war keeps switching for you?

sehugg 7y ago

Whether or not the occupant has just been impeached for leveraging public assets against political enemies seems to also be a relevant factor.

TallGuyShort 7y ago
Even that seems to 100% be prior party lines anyway.
- bduerst 7y ago
  >Even that seems to 100% be prior party lines anyway. The non-partisan GAO seems to disagree: https://apnews.com/9127109f325778490fd40c5f98be1817 https://apnews.com/9127109f325778490fd40c5f98be1817
  - TallGuyShort 7y ago
    That's somewhat irrelevant to the question of what people's opinions are of the power the president should have though, isn't it. I'm not defending Trump, I'm saying that D's are currently arguing he shouldn't have power that they would be happy to see exercised if it wasn't an R in office.
    - bduerst 7y ago
      Sure, if this had precedence. Would you say illegal actions taken by the president are relevant to whether they should continue to have power? This is the question that non-partisan people are considering.
      - TallGuyShort 7y ago
        >> Would you say illegal actions taken by the president are relevant to whether they should continue to have power? Absolutely and immediately, once convicted, but that hasn't happened. And to emphasize my point about party lines - how much do you want to bet it won't happen? But let's be clear that my first comment was tongue-in-cheek. I'm not saying the president ACTUALLY has more power depending on the party. I'm saying that things people were fine with under Obama are suddenly a problem under Trump. And I will expect the same thing next time there's a Democrat in office - suddenly Republicans will flip-flop on the way the office is supposed to operate. edit: Maybe a more appropriate question is, among people who label themselves as "Democrat" and "Republican", who thinks that Trump should lose power after his impeachment, who also thinks that Clinton should have lost power after his impeachment?
        shadowgovt 7y ago
        It's a bit of an apples to oranges comparison since one of them was impeached for lying to a grand jury (about a topic that was outside the scope of the investigation and more than a little irrelevant to any questions of high crimes and misdemeanors) and another was impeached for abuse of the power of his office to solicit aid from a foreign country in collecting damaging information on a political rival. Intent and outcomes matter if the question is "Should this person lose power?"