California’s governor is being touted as a successor to the Biden throne. Though he’s often imagined as a beacon of progress, his feckless record shows otherwise.
It’s another way of looking at it. You’re always going to have a fascist element in society who loves the “greater evil”. Maybe we should demand more than “not quite as bad” to represent the opposition. Every time the “lesser evil” manages to win and then disappoints people, it demoralizes its own electorate. Every time the dems move rightward on issues, they push the “greater evil” even further right. This is how “lesser-evilism” helps bring us to where we are now.
So, I don’t think you are entirely wrong, but I think you (and by extension, all americans) are out of luck on that front. There is not a single democratic candidate who, if elected with a supermajority in congress and a supportive supreme court, that would turn around the economic situation in the US from the course it’s on.
You can get some wins with social issues and foreign policy, and tinker around the edges of the economy, but even if Sanders or AOC became dictators tomorrow, their stated goals, while being light years ahead of Trump or any Republican, would not reverse the decline in living standards for the majority of Americans.
For the issues most Americans care about most, their pocket book, lesser evil is all there is or will be for the foreseeable future.
The lesser evil gets more evil every cycle. Foreign policy is the least likely to change between administrations. We are watching how an executive can wield power in spite of the courts and legislature.
Let’s be clear, the courts and legislature could stop this, they choose not to. They are captured. When/if a Democrat reaches the White House again they will not have half the power that Trump wields.
(The courts are a little iffy, but I’m still confident the legislature could stop it if they wanted)
Less direct: passing laws stating “you can’t do that.”
Least direct but the final boss: denying funding to whatever department he is using to do things they don’t like.
I suppose a full coup could establish funding sources not controlled by congress, but I suspect that things like bond markets would react unfavorably to a government power struggle on that scale. A dictator unconstrained by constitutional safeguards is not a safe bet to lend money to, and economic firestorm would topple even a successful coup as billionaires, pensions, and corporations saw their wealth evaporate and working people lost their jobs.
Impeachment as a tool has been demonstrated to be basically worthless. Trump has demonstrated pretty clearly that our whole system relied almost entirely on everyone respecting the rules. Turns out there isn’t really anything preventing full executive power. Ultimately, it comes down to the military. They are really the only force capable of removing the president.
It’s another way of looking at it. You’re always going to have a fascist element in society who loves the “greater evil”. Maybe we should demand more than “not quite as bad” to represent the opposition. Every time the “lesser evil” manages to win and then disappoints people, it demoralizes its own electorate. Every time the dems move rightward on issues, they push the “greater evil” even further right. This is how “lesser-evilism” helps bring us to where we are now.
So, I don’t think you are entirely wrong, but I think you (and by extension, all americans) are out of luck on that front. There is not a single democratic candidate who, if elected with a supermajority in congress and a supportive supreme court, that would turn around the economic situation in the US from the course it’s on.
You can get some wins with social issues and foreign policy, and tinker around the edges of the economy, but even if Sanders or AOC became dictators tomorrow, their stated goals, while being light years ahead of Trump or any Republican, would not reverse the decline in living standards for the majority of Americans.
For the issues most Americans care about most, their pocket book, lesser evil is all there is or will be for the foreseeable future.
The lesser evil gets more evil every cycle. Foreign policy is the least likely to change between administrations. We are watching how an executive can wield power in spite of the courts and legislature.
Let’s be clear, the courts and legislature could stop this, they choose not to. They are captured. When/if a Democrat reaches the White House again they will not have half the power that Trump wields.
(The courts are a little iffy, but I’m still confident the legislature could stop it if they wanted)
Could they? By what mechanism?
Most obviously: impeachment.
Less direct: passing laws stating “you can’t do that.”
Least direct but the final boss: denying funding to whatever department he is using to do things they don’t like.
I suppose a full coup could establish funding sources not controlled by congress, but I suspect that things like bond markets would react unfavorably to a government power struggle on that scale. A dictator unconstrained by constitutional safeguards is not a safe bet to lend money to, and economic firestorm would topple even a successful coup as billionaires, pensions, and corporations saw their wealth evaporate and working people lost their jobs.
Impeachment as a tool has been demonstrated to be basically worthless. Trump has demonstrated pretty clearly that our whole system relied almost entirely on everyone respecting the rules. Turns out there isn’t really anything preventing full executive power. Ultimately, it comes down to the military. They are really the only force capable of removing the president.
Impeachment is worthless without a supermajority in the Senate.
I didn’t specify party. Congress could remove him, the Republican Senators refuse to do so.
I don’t think, if they voted to impeach, the FBI and capitol police would be like “nah, we are keeping him.”
I could be wrong, but I doubt it.