Thinking the unthinkable--how to survive a Trump presidency-
Jun 20, 2016 23:05:53 #
Thinking the unthinkable--how to survive a Trump presidency--58h.,b58
The assumption here is that the event will happen and the time for mulling, fretting, and moral agonizing over how to prevent it is over. The issue then becomes one for unemotional analysis. Is it possible to escape the worst outcome that so many have prognosticated and ensure that, in the end, the essentials of the American political system will remain intact with the nation's basic interests protected?
Strategic analysis, by contrast, proceeds under the logic of contingency planning, in which it is deemed worthwhile to study a major disaster that, though improbable, could theoretically take place. Such studies of hypothetical's may be compelling material for a convention of civil engineers or insurance actuaries, but they are hardly the stuff of which news stories are made. And today. while the mere mention of a Trump victory is sufficient to elicit reactions of horror, most calm down upon hearing the pollsters' predictions of Republican oblivion if the billionaire heads the ticket.
Some decisions key to improving the chances of surviving a Trump presidency are already at hand. The longer we wait, the more limited will be the options available and the more diminished the chances of success.
The Republican convention in Cleveland could well turn out to have more than one b****t for the presidency, which opens up the possibility of reactivating the party's power to select the vice p**********l nominee. And even if Donald Trump is able to force his way on the convention on the first b****t. it is clear already that he will not fully control the majority of the delegates for other matters. Party officials should accordingly seize the opportunity now to make clear that the convention reserves the prerogative to select the vice p**********l candidate.
He will not pick an outsider but "a political person ... who can help him with legislation, getting it through, and all that. A party choice modifies the excessive view of the p**********l nomination as a pure and simple c****ation and begins to teach the lesson that the power of a leader in America's political system is subject to robust checks.
Donald Trump would experience the limits of his power. After all, it is finally the party, not the p**********l nominee. that certifies the names that go on state b****ts. A prominent politician with ambitions for the future might well calculate that accepting an invitation to run as the Donald's choice, in an e******n in which defeat may seem likely, would be a sure career ender. The field of vice p**********l candidates is likely to increase Republicans if the se******n is made by the convention, as this method would help immunize the candidate from subsequent reprisal. To be sure, the two nominees would have to reach a meeting of the minds, with the vice p**********l candidate naturally acceding in substantial measure to the p**********l candidate.
The only response is to consider a kind of cost-benefit calculation: how much Trump's electability is enhanced by a more credible vice p**********l candidate (the amount seems minuscule), weighed against how much this step might add to the prospect of a more survivable Trump presidency.
T he next item in a strategic analysis of survival is the place of policy advisers and potential candidates for the cabinet. Already, choices have to be made. Should good and qualified persons, despite serious, reservations about the suitability of Trump for the presidency, make themselves available if asked? The risk of doing so, besides the danger of becoming tainted by association, is that it might once again add a measure of credibility to a campaign. Even ardent supporters of a Stop Trump movement should see the wisdom of maintaining a potential group of quality cabinet appointees from whom Trump might pick. These people should be shielded , rather than shunned.
On a larger scale, the objective is to encourage the se******n of advisers and cabinet appointees who are not—as has so often been the case recently—merely "president's men" or sycophants trying to make a career.
Trump will need to reach out beyond the limited circle of persons with whom anal he is now acquainted. The risk for him, though a benefit to possible the country, would be the uncomfortable independence of certain individuals, as well as the greater influence that group of levelheaded cabinet members might possess.
A Trump presidency could initiate a dramatic shift in the institutional balance of power between the executive and Congress. The legislature's chronic weakness in recent years has rested in part on the growth of partisan polarization, which incentivizes the president's co-partisans in Congress not just to acquiesce to, but also encourage, acts of executive overreach. The Obama years offer rich testimony to this distortion of the Constitution. Trump would, by contrast, have the full buy-in of neither of the two main parties. Congress would then wield formidable power, presenting a vital check on any attempts by Trump to govern unencumbered.
The power of Congress would suddenly look very different. It could even open the way to a more constitutional relationship between president and Congress, rather than one distorted by parties. A credible vice president could turn out to be the nation's. not the president's, trump card,
source-weekly standard, james ceaser, oliver ward,
The assumption here is that the event will happen and the time for mulling, fretting, and moral agonizing over how to prevent it is over. The issue then becomes one for unemotional analysis. Is it possible to escape the worst outcome that so many have prognosticated and ensure that, in the end, the essentials of the American political system will remain intact with the nation's basic interests protected?
Strategic analysis, by contrast, proceeds under the logic of contingency planning, in which it is deemed worthwhile to study a major disaster that, though improbable, could theoretically take place. Such studies of hypothetical's may be compelling material for a convention of civil engineers or insurance actuaries, but they are hardly the stuff of which news stories are made. And today. while the mere mention of a Trump victory is sufficient to elicit reactions of horror, most calm down upon hearing the pollsters' predictions of Republican oblivion if the billionaire heads the ticket.
Some decisions key to improving the chances of surviving a Trump presidency are already at hand. The longer we wait, the more limited will be the options available and the more diminished the chances of success.
The Republican convention in Cleveland could well turn out to have more than one b****t for the presidency, which opens up the possibility of reactivating the party's power to select the vice p**********l nominee. And even if Donald Trump is able to force his way on the convention on the first b****t. it is clear already that he will not fully control the majority of the delegates for other matters. Party officials should accordingly seize the opportunity now to make clear that the convention reserves the prerogative to select the vice p**********l candidate.
He will not pick an outsider but "a political person ... who can help him with legislation, getting it through, and all that. A party choice modifies the excessive view of the p**********l nomination as a pure and simple c****ation and begins to teach the lesson that the power of a leader in America's political system is subject to robust checks.
Donald Trump would experience the limits of his power. After all, it is finally the party, not the p**********l nominee. that certifies the names that go on state b****ts. A prominent politician with ambitions for the future might well calculate that accepting an invitation to run as the Donald's choice, in an e******n in which defeat may seem likely, would be a sure career ender. The field of vice p**********l candidates is likely to increase Republicans if the se******n is made by the convention, as this method would help immunize the candidate from subsequent reprisal. To be sure, the two nominees would have to reach a meeting of the minds, with the vice p**********l candidate naturally acceding in substantial measure to the p**********l candidate.
The only response is to consider a kind of cost-benefit calculation: how much Trump's electability is enhanced by a more credible vice p**********l candidate (the amount seems minuscule), weighed against how much this step might add to the prospect of a more survivable Trump presidency.
T he next item in a strategic analysis of survival is the place of policy advisers and potential candidates for the cabinet. Already, choices have to be made. Should good and qualified persons, despite serious, reservations about the suitability of Trump for the presidency, make themselves available if asked? The risk of doing so, besides the danger of becoming tainted by association, is that it might once again add a measure of credibility to a campaign. Even ardent supporters of a Stop Trump movement should see the wisdom of maintaining a potential group of quality cabinet appointees from whom Trump might pick. These people should be shielded , rather than shunned.
On a larger scale, the objective is to encourage the se******n of advisers and cabinet appointees who are not—as has so often been the case recently—merely "president's men" or sycophants trying to make a career.
Trump will need to reach out beyond the limited circle of persons with whom anal he is now acquainted. The risk for him, though a benefit to possible the country, would be the uncomfortable independence of certain individuals, as well as the greater influence that group of levelheaded cabinet members might possess.
A Trump presidency could initiate a dramatic shift in the institutional balance of power between the executive and Congress. The legislature's chronic weakness in recent years has rested in part on the growth of partisan polarization, which incentivizes the president's co-partisans in Congress not just to acquiesce to, but also encourage, acts of executive overreach. The Obama years offer rich testimony to this distortion of the Constitution. Trump would, by contrast, have the full buy-in of neither of the two main parties. Congress would then wield formidable power, presenting a vital check on any attempts by Trump to govern unencumbered.
The power of Congress would suddenly look very different. It could even open the way to a more constitutional relationship between president and Congress, rather than one distorted by parties. A credible vice president could turn out to be the nation's. not the president's, trump card,
source-weekly standard, james ceaser, oliver ward,
Jun 21, 2016 00:34:26 #
thebigp wrote:
Thinking the unthinkable--how to survive a Trump p... (show quote)
Trump might encourage Congress to do its job? Attrition is the only fix for most of this Congress, and the sooner the better!
Jun 21, 2016 00:46:32 #
Congress do their job, oh my what an idea. A long with that they can live on the same salary as the average American, no more perks like being driven to work, no more parties at tax payer expense, how about just no more.
BigMike wrote:
Trump might encourage Congress to do its job? Attrition is the only fix for most of this Congress, and the sooner the better!
Jun 21, 2016 01:01:06 #
bmac32 wrote:
Congress do their job, oh my what an idea. A long with that they can live on the same salary as the average American, no more perks like being driven to work, no more parties at tax payer expense, how about just no more.
What they'd better do, is start acting like Congress and put the other two branches in check, goddammit! We send them to Washington to do that and it's as if they joined a country club or something! They let Obama and the Supremes run amok while they argue over gay marriage and what fucking words are acceptable in polite society while WWIII is brewing in the Euphrates River Valley and fruitcakes are being imported from there, just in time to go ape-s**t when it pops off! They've pretended long enough to be opposed to this g*******t s**t. Strut and yell and posture and act like they're close to the heart of the people when running for office and join right in on the Establisment gravy train as soon as they get there.
Jun 21, 2016 01:17:08 #
thebigp wrote:
Thinking the unthinkable--how to survive a Trump p... (show quote)
I think the only question is will he want the presidency once he realizes that he can't do what he wants and that he is even going to have to work with people if he hopes to accomplish anything. I can't help that think, not only will the WH be slumming it for him, but the job really isn't going to be any fun at all...
Jun 21, 2016 01:46:37 #
PeterS wrote:
Obama found a way to do what he wanted and I think Trump will be far better at working with all sides. You never expected the job to be fun and is only taking it on out of love of country. Obama took it on as his life's mission to do what any Muslim/c*******t radical revolutionary would want to do -- bring down America. Surviving leftism is what America needs to worry about, not surviving Trump.I think the only question is will he want the presidency once he realizes that he can't do what he wants and that he is even going to have to work with people if he hopes to accomplish anything. I can't help that think, not only will the WH be slumming it for him, but the job really isn't going to be any fun at all...
Jun 21, 2016 07:33:56 #
Obama yes, the judges no, it's the judges job to judge on law and strike down laws that are unconstitutional. Congress needs special interest out of the way. Reagan was right, when you start running out of money the choices become hard and we're are already see it.
BigMike wrote:
What they'd i better /i do, is start acting like... (show quote)
Jun 21, 2016 09:44:56 #
PeterS wrote:
I think the only question is will he want the presidency once he realizes that he can't do what he wants and that he is even going to have to work with people if he hopes to accomplish anything. I can't help that think, not only will the WH be slumming it for him, but the job really isn't going to be any fun at all...
Unlike our current President, he's a negotiator. Instead of unilateral decisions, I'm sure he can find compromise. Worst case, he can do as Obama and blame everybody else.
As far as the job being fun, well.... trips to Hawaii, weekly golf outings, ect...at taxpayers expense seems to be the new norm., so dont worry it won't be all work.
Jun 21, 2016 10:31:57 #
bmac32 wrote:
Obama yes, the judges no, it's the judges job to judge on law and strike down laws that are unconstitutional. Congress needs special interest out of the way. Reagan was right, when you start running out of money the choices become hard and we're are already see it.
Faugh! They've been making law! And they've been doing it because Congress is abrogating their responsibility. How else did gay marriage become the law of the land? Woke up one day and BANG! Now Christian bakers and florists are under assault by these assholes! That's just a recent and obvious example. There are many more. Judicial activism, they call it.
Jun 21, 2016 11:23:45 #
BigMike wrote:
Faugh! They've been making law! And they've been doing it because Congress is abrogating their responsibility. How else did gay marriage become the law of the land? Woke up one day and BANG! Now Christian bakers and florists are under assault by these assholes! That's just a recent and obvious example. There are many more. Judicial activism, they call it.
Not to mention kids don't even know what bathroom to use anymore.
Jun 21, 2016 13:04:14 #
the waker wrote:
Not to mention kids don't even know what bathroom to use anymore.
Yep...that's another recent one, and the only way they were able to do it is that Congress has been too busy making connections and feeding at the trough to give a damn.
Jun 21, 2016 14:03:21 #
BigMike wrote:
Yep...that's another recent one, and the only way they were able to do it is that Congress has been too busy making connections and feeding at the trough to give a damn.
Hey as long as they get they're $500 dollar haircuts, right.
Atleast since we got the Dems out of Congress Lamborghini has-been able to catch up w/ demand in the DC area.😉
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.