[quote]pushharder wrote:
Let’s discuss what we face if he retains the presidency.
My first thought is with not having to face the electorate again we can expect an avalanche of executive orders, end runs around Congress.[/quote]
Soo… nothing would change?
A huge push to win back the House.
What did Bush and Clinton do?
Something unfriendly to the 2nd.
Oh and plenty more “you’re racist” comments if you disagree with anything he does. Can’t wait for 4 more years of that…
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Let’s discuss what we face if he retains the presidency.
My first thought is with not having to face the electorate again we can expect an avalanche of executive orders, end runs around Congress.[/quote]
Yep, we’re fucked…Don’t underestimate the power of the stupidity of the public. The people who are going to sway this election scarcely know there is an election going on…
Great question, Push.
I think that he tries to define what he wishes his legacy to be.
His first term was defined too much by circumstances (i.e. the worst economy since the recession); others (from the far right; to conspirators; to the TeaPublicans and even Nancy Pelosi) ; and the political-capital draining/partisan Patient Protection and Affordability Act. (Which chewed up FAR too much political capital with very little gained).
As the saying goes; “I just don’t think the man wants to go out like that…”
Contrary to what “PWI” thinks; the President is a smart man; with a sense of History, and his place among his predecessors.
IF that legacy is as important to him as I think it is; I just don’t see him carrying on “business as usual”; but instead does things that are indicative of a man that not only still has to govern; but has to live with what history thinks of him for years to come.
We’ll see…
Maybe…
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Great question, Push.
I think that he tries to define what he wishes his legacy to be.
His first term was defined too much by circumstances (i.e. the worst economy since the recession); others (from the far right; to conspirators; to the TeaPublicans and even Nancy Pelosi) ; and the political-capital draining/partisan Patient Protection and Affordability Act. (Which chewed up FAR too much political capital with very little gained).
As the saying goes; “I just don’t think the man wants to go out like that…”
Contrary to what “PWI” thinks; the President is a smart man; with a sense of History, and his place among his predecessors.
IF that legacy is as important to him as I think it is; I just don’t see him carrying on “business as usual”; but instead does things that are indicative of a man that not only still has to govern; but has to live with what history thinks of him for years to come.
We’ll see…
Maybe…
Mufasa[/quote]
So, what you are saying is that he will do the opposite of what he has always done?
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Great question, Push.
I think that he tries to define what he wishes his legacy to be.
His first term was defined too much by circumstances (i.e. the worst economy since the recession); others (from the far right; to conspirators; to the TeaPublicans and even Nancy Pelosi) ; and the political-capital draining/partisan Patient Protection and Affordability Act. (Which chewed up FAR too much political capital with very little gained).
As the saying goes; “I just don’t think the man wants to go out like that…”
Contrary to what “PWI” thinks; the President is a smart man; with a sense of History, and his place among his predecessors.
IF that legacy is as important to him as I think it is; I just don’t see him carrying on “business as usual”; but instead does things that are indicative of a man that not only still has to govern; but has to live with what history thinks of him for years to come.
We’ll see…
Maybe…
Mufasa[/quote]
So, what you are saying is that he will do the opposite of what he has always done?[/quote]
I think that he tries to define what he wishes his legacy to be.
Mufasa
I believe he frames an electoral victory as a strong mandate and big endorsement of his grand vision, and I believe he tries to drive through an even more ambitious agenda. I also think that he would be emboldened because there’d be no re-election to worry about.
No matter what the vote count or the changes in Congress, he’ll claim the people want him to charge forward. And he’ll use executive power more and more to try and achieve these ends, because he has proven he doesn’t govern well when challenged by differing ideas by people who also have authority to affect the outcome of policy, and he’ll have to go his own way where he gets to preside over an adminsitrative fiefdom.
But, I don’t necessarily think that would be a bad thing long term - it would force a (bigger) national discussion over the use (and abuse) of the regulatory state (which we are way overdue on).