ex-President Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at low-info Boomers like my religions aunts. I have two questions:
a) Is anyone here who supports Trump bothered by lies like this?
b) Does anyone know what he's even talking about here? Like is there some grain of truth that he's embellishing on bigly?
the prime minister has MORE power in the UK, IF it's party is strong in parliament AND if he is well respected by MPs.
POTUS in USA never controls congress by any means even when it's his own party, at least not after FDR.
UK prime minister per se has far lower powers, because most/all powers are in the parliament by design, but given the PM is often the leader of the party... there is LESS separation of powers int the UK than in the USA obvi
Well he doesn't control the police, that's for sure.
Jeebuz. If the politicians took over the fed we would be so screwed.
Actually, I just looked it up and the DOJ is an executive department. In which case, I disagree, yes. I think the DOJ should be independent. The president in the US has way too much power as it is. Our PM in the UK has nowhere near that much power.
We all know Meghan wields all the power over there
Anyone with two brain cells to rub together "skews left" by US standards. I am a moderate in the rest of the civilised world; in the US I would probably be considered a card carrying commie.
Ok so your claim is that it would be anti-democratic in the USA to shift the balance of political leaning among federal employees in washington to more closely represent the actual preferences of the population, because the USA median voter is too rightwing.
You keep calling having rightwing preferences anti-democratic, do you realize that?
Ok so your claim is that it would be anti-democratic in the USA to shift the balance of political leaning among federal employees in washington to more closely represent the actual preferences of the population, because the USA median voter is too rightwing.
You keep calling having rightwing preferences anti-democratic, do you realize that?
If we transferred all of the bureaucratic responsibilities over to this current crop of republicans they would absolutely destroy this country in record time.
you do lol, it's just separated from prosecution.
Minister of State (Minister for Crime, Policing and Fire)
https://www.gov.uk/government/ministers/...
What you don't have is prosecution being an executive power. It stands with the CPS which is actually independent
If we transferred all of the bureaucratic responsibilities over to this current crop of republicans they would absolutely destroy this country in record time.
thinking they would do a terrible job isn't the same as claiming it would anti-democratic to have more right leaning federal employees
Do you disagree with the claim that Washington DC based federal employees skew leftwing dramatically today?
Or you think it's bad if that gets fixed, if so why?
Ideally anyone with any actual power in any executive department should at the very least not oppose the president agenda, or you disagree with this as well? you would find that anti-democratic?
There is a distinction in the United States between executive agencies and independent federal agencies. Many of the agencies that you probably imagine are executive agencies -- e.g., CIA, ITC, SEC, CFTC, FDIC, FRB, FTC, NLRB, FEC, USPS--are, in fact, independent federal agencies.
Ok so your claim is that it would be anti-democratic in the USA to shift the balance of political leaning among federal employees in washington to more closely represent the actual preferences of the population, because the USA median voter is too rightwing.
You keep calling having rightwing preferences anti-democratic, do you realize that?
Actually, I was asking how replacing a bunch of normal people with the same number or more of conservative zealots is "reducing the size of government".
Actually, I just looked it up and the DOJ is an executive department. In which case, I disagree, yes. I think the DOJ should be independent. The president in the US has way too much power as it is. Our PM in the UK has nowhere near that much power.
The DOJ is an executive agency, but it historically has operated more like an independent agency.
you do lol, it's just separated from prosecution.
Minister of State (Minister for Crime, Policing and Fire)
https://www.gov.uk/government/ministers/...
What you don't have is prosecution being an executive power. It stands with the CPS which is actually independent
OK, well that's the one that counts. You get arrested, you might spend a couple of days in a cell. You get charged and tried, you night spend the rest of your life in a cell.
There is a distinction in the United States between executive agencies and independent federal agencies. Many of the agencies that you probably imagine are executive agencies -- e.g., CIA, ITC, SEC, CFTC, FDIC, FRB, FTC, NLRB, FEC, USPS--are, in fact, independent federal agencies.
i am not confusing that check what i wrote about specific departments and when i used the words executive power and so on.
Anwyay independent agencies as well should hire more rightwing people
Actually, I was asking how replacing a bunch of normal people with the same number or more of conservative zealots is "reducing the size of government".
I listed the intended reductions of government power, there are many others.
But DoE abolition and EPA reduction within the narrow text of delegated powers, same for FCC and so on, are reductions of the size of gvmnt
Luciom,
You are getting way too hung up on the word fascism, which you equate with expansive government. Regardless of whether you view gutting the State Department, EPA, etc., as anti-fascist, there is little question in my mind that Trump is personally authoritarian.
Luciom,
You are getting way too hung up on the word fascism, which you equate with expansive government. Regardless of whether you view gutting the State Department, EPA, etc., as anti-fascist, there is little question in my mind that Trump is personally authoritarian.
an increase in the scope of government isn't always fascism, but it's a necessary not sufficient condition of fascism. Decreasing the role of government in society instead is always anti-fascist. The lss gvmnt does the less fascism is physically possible.
Trump isn't authoritarian at all in the sense of wanting to dismantle individual freedoms, of controlling people behaviour and so on. He doesn't give a **** about how you go about your life, what you eat, what you say and isn't willing to use widespread state violence to force behaviour upon you, at least, he is less than normal leftist politicians are.
