08-08-2020, 01:33 AM
(08-08-2020, 12:53 AM)Dill Wrote: No, the Framers did not want gridlock and "ideological stability" of the sort here referenced, which keeps one party in enough control of legislation to make sure that nothing gets done--i.e., prevents good governance. If you think they did, I'd like to know to whom you are referring and in what you call evidence.
Yes, they absolutely did for two reasons. One it would prevent hastily enacted legislation and two it would encourage compromise. If the parties cannot compromise that is not indicative of the flaws of the framers design but that of the two current parties.
Quote:And yes, people want Biden over Trump for reasons the Framers well understood. The presidency was designed to be an office that required internal restraint, selfless sacrifice, and "buy in" regarding the ideals upon which the Republic was founded. Trump is the anti-thesis of that. Hence the many fact-based threads in this forum on his corruption, abuse of power, and incompetence.
"People", what an utterly useless statement. Some "people" want Biden, some "people" want Trump.
Quote:To continue the theme of "stability" and "entirely subjective" ideals, people on both sides of the aisle understand what it means when a President continually contradicts and mis-states his own official policies, which he cannot articulate, doesn't grasp basic points of law, and fires people who speak truth to power. His mismanagement of the pandemic brings the same disorganization and confusion-with-consequences to the domestic arena as it already has in foreign policy, which few people follow. So at the moment, the priority of the majority of US voters--and me-- would be that we don't want Trump. Certainly many Republicans (far from a majority) would prefer to get rid of Trump and keep a Republican Senate, but they understand that getting rid of Trump is in the larger interest of the country. So as I said, they are putting the country before party, though as a minority of that party.
You keep repeating the same points as if endless repetition lends your point extra validity. I understand your position, it is absolutist and brooks no dissent. You state your position as an objective truth allowing no counter argument. No need to respond further, you've made your point clear and I've made my opposition to it equally clear. Thank you and enjoy your weekend.
