What is your present favorability rating of Donald Trump's executive actions?
Absolutely Favor
7.3% (10)
7.3% (10)
Mostly Favor
8.8% (12)
8.8% (12)
Barely Favor
1.5% (2)
1.5% (2)
Neutral
2.9% (4)
2.9% (4)
Barely Disfavor
1.5% (2)
1.5% (2)
Mostly Disfavor
19.7% (27)
19.7% (27)
Absolutely Disfavor
57.7% (79)
57.7% (79)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: Donald Trump Executive Actions General

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

DONALD TRUMP EXECUTIVE ACTIONS GENERAL

Please explain and discuss the executive actions being performed by Donald Trump here.

Trump has arranged a media blackout on the EPA meaning they cannot communicate in any way social media or otherwise, and has cut off all new contracts and grants to the EPA, making the EPA obsolete and has cut many EPA jobs in the process immediately. They are tax-payer funded, meaning information the tax-payers paid for is not being allowed communication. This is what you would reasonably refer to as totalitarian suppression of knowledge, and is an action of what a dictator would do with information. All press inquiries on the matter have been ordered to go through his department for approval.

He has taken steps to advance the construction of Dakota Access and Keystone XL pipelines, both of which have been heavily protested by Native Americans and public activists for their transportation of crude near aquifiers when the pipeline could easily be constructed in a different location.

There are many more he has performed and is starting on, such as the obvious pulling the U.S.A. out of the TPP agreement, as well as planning to focus federal funding on a wall tomorrow and limiting immigration.

The first white house petition Trump has received has been for him to release his tax returns, so he will have to act on responding to this petition since it surpassed 100,000 signatures.

Donald Trump has lied about there being a mass voter fraud of 3-5 million false votes, and this has been used as an excuse to promote voter ID laws in the U.S. even though nearly nobody in the entire U.S. actually fakes votes.

He has also lied about the size of his inauguration crowds, since if you have lied about the actions of millions of voters, you might as well lie about how big your inauguration crowd was. He has accused the media naturally of lying about the size of his crowds. Trump has also said the media will "pay a big price" for accurately reporting the size of his inauguration crowd.

And of course there is the worst executive action he has performed so far. Becoming president.

On the EPA: My education maybe made moot and my job maybe threatened because of this. My moral beliefs are shaken.
...
I really don't like Trump.

I'm honestly too angry to comment on anything else.

Its probably not good. I can't speculate any more because its been less than a week and there's been no real action/reaction yet.
But its probably not good.

Story:
On the EPA: My education maybe made moot and my job maybe threatened because of this. My moral beliefs are shaken.
...
I really don't like Trump.

I'm honestly too angry to comment on anything else.

I am very sorry for your loss. Hate to say this and I mean, I hate to say this is my honest advice, but you might just seek to move to another English-speaking country if it is not reinstated by the next president; for many I am sure that is too costly. You may alternatively have to reconsider how to utilize your skillset and education, if there are other possible routes available.

I personally, hate the man strongly. Like anyone I strongly hate, there are a few lovable qualities (I am a fan of memes); but the hate far outweighs the love. I invite you to voice this well-justified anger online, and offline in any coming protests with others who feel as you feel if you wish to. Works as both a highly effective stress ball and an effective engagement in the political world.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-muslim-ban-refugees_us_58877244e4b096b4a2349927?ioficaiiz1xn06yldi&

Looks like he'll be taking his first step towards his 'muslim ban'.

Also, not an executive order, but has anyone noticed who he's putting at the head of the FCC? Pai doesn't exactly come off as a fan of net neutrality.

Epyc Wynn:

Story:
On the EPA: My education maybe made moot and my job maybe threatened because of this. My moral beliefs are shaken.
...
I really don't like Trump.

I'm honestly too angry to comment on anything else.

I am very sorry for your loss. Hate to say this and I mean, I hate to say this is my honest advice, but you might just seek to move to another English-speaking country if it is not reinstated by the next president; for many I am sure that is too costly. You may alternative have to reconsider how to utilize your skillset and education, if there are other possible routes available.

I personally, hate the man strongly. Like anyone I strongly hate, there are a few lovable qualities (I am a fan of memes); but the hate far outweighs the love. I invite you to voice this well-justified anger online, and offline in any coming protests with others who feel as you feel if you wish to. Works as both a highly effective stress ball and an effective engagement in the political world.

Thanks for the kind words.
Not all of us can afford to move or have connections to other countries that allow us to move. And honestly I'm over reacting: I mean I work in a municipal plant not federal branch like the EPA(though that was my goal in the future) Sure, we do get a lot of our funding from federal grants so it trickles down, but the worst that can happen is increased taxes on local areas in which we serve. And the removal of my position I suppose at THE worst level; but I have a great Union and can be placed somewhere else in the facility just not in my field of interest or eduction. I will be shocked if Trump unwisely starts messing with Unions. Still I was freaking out all day once I read this.
Combined that with the fact that I strongly believe in Enviornmental Ethics (it is my BA major) and this type of action from Trump just makes me angry. I even morally questioned if silencing the EPA like that was even legal which it is sadly.

I never wish ill will on people but really want Trump to self destruct in one way or another (though it still leaves Pence so that might even not matter). I laughed before at him too, never thinking he had a chance and then later believing he might actually do some good. I even laughed at the memes (I still love to say "alternative facts" jokingly). But he's not a good person and he's going to do a lot of damage apparently very quickly.

The first Enviornmental disaster will be on him, like he'll even care.

So far he has denied climate change, attempted to screw over women in several ways, held a dick-waving contest with China and filled his cabinet with all the scum that was too extreme for previous administrations

The re-instatement (and buffing) of that old ban on foreign aid recipients providing abortion advice is going to literally kill people, whether through unsafe abortions or through the sudden loss in aid funding.

The Muslim ban is apparently going ahead in its least filtered, most discriminatory form. Indefinite bars to all Syrian refugees entering the United States. I'm sure that'll solve the refugee crisis, or at least move it to some other country so America doesn't have to think about it.

The situation with the EPA is outright information suppression. Thankfully, I don't think Trump will ever successfully suppress information leaks without firing most current government employees. He'll probably just insist that they're lying instead.

He hasn't started a nuclear war yet, but it's been a shitty first week.

bastardofmelbourne:
The re-instatement (and buffing) of that old ban on foreign aid recipients providing abortion advice is going to literally kill people, whether through unsafe abortions or through the sudden loss in aid funding.

The Muslim ban is apparently going ahead in its least filtered, most discriminatory form. Indefinite bars to all Syrian refugees entering the United States. I'm sure that'll solve the refugee crisis, or at least move it to some other country so America doesn't have to think about it.

The situation with the EPA is outright information suppression. Thankfully, I don't think Trump will ever successfully suppress information leaks without firing most current government employees. He'll probably just insist that they're lying instead.

He hasn't started a nuclear war yet, but it's been a shitty first week.

If anyone had issue with wikileaks before, I hope they reconsider when they become the de facto EPA database. I'm calling it now. environmental data is going to become suppressed. What prevents us from suing polluters for ruining our planet and confiscating assets to fix things?

On an unrelated and entirely speculative note what measures prevent secret service members from going rogue like the Praetorians did?

FriendoftheFallen:

bastardofmelbourne:
The re-instatement (and buffing) of that old ban on foreign aid recipients providing abortion advice is going to literally kill people, whether through unsafe abortions or through the sudden loss in aid funding.

The Muslim ban is apparently going ahead in its least filtered, most discriminatory form. Indefinite bars to all Syrian refugees entering the United States. I'm sure that'll solve the refugee crisis, or at least move it to some other country so America doesn't have to think about it.

The situation with the EPA is outright information suppression. Thankfully, I don't think Trump will ever successfully suppress information leaks without firing most current government employees. He'll probably just insist that they're lying instead.

He hasn't started a nuclear war yet, but it's been a shitty first week.

If anyone had issue with wikileaks before, I hope they reconsider when they become the de facto EPA database.

On an unrelated and entirely speculative note what measures prevent secret service members from going rogue like the Praetorians did?

Who?

Epyc Wynn:

FriendoftheFallen:

bastardofmelbourne:
The re-instatement (and buffing) of that old ban on foreign aid recipients providing abortion advice is going to literally kill people, whether through unsafe abortions or through the sudden loss in aid funding.

The Muslim ban is apparently going ahead in its least filtered, most discriminatory form. Indefinite bars to all Syrian refugees entering the United States. I'm sure that'll solve the refugee crisis, or at least move it to some other country so America doesn't have to think about it.

The situation with the EPA is outright information suppression. Thankfully, I don't think Trump will ever successfully suppress information leaks without firing most current government employees. He'll probably just insist that they're lying instead.

He hasn't started a nuclear war yet, but it's been a shitty first week.

If anyone had issue with wikileaks before, I hope they reconsider when they become the de facto EPA database.

On an unrelated and entirely speculative note what measures prevent secret service members from going rogue like the Praetorians did?

Who?

What do you mean by who? To whom do you refer by your who? I am honestly confused, not attempting to be in any way combative.

bastardofmelbourne:

The situation with the EPA is outright information suppression. Thankfully, I don't think Trump will ever successfully suppress information leaks without firing most current government employees. He'll probably just insist that they're lying instead.

It rather makes you want to start a pool on when WikiLeaks will jump into the fray again, doesn't it?

Asita:

bastardofmelbourne:

The situation with the EPA is outright information suppression. Thankfully, I don't think Trump will ever successfully suppress information leaks without firing most current government employees. He'll probably just insist that they're lying instead.

It rather makes you want to start a pool on when WikiLeaks will jump into the fray again, doesn't it?

Like I said earlier, wikileaks will be the new EPA database.

FriendoftheFallen:

Epyc Wynn:

FriendoftheFallen:

If anyone had issue with wikileaks before, I hope they reconsider when they become the de facto EPA database.

On an unrelated and entirely speculative note what measures prevent secret service members from going rogue like the Praetorians did?

Who?

What do you mean by who? To whom do you refer by your who? I am honestly confused, not attempting to be in any way combative.

Never heard of the Praetorians.

Epyc Wynn:

FriendoftheFallen:

Epyc Wynn:

Who?

What do you mean by who? To whom do you refer by your who? I am honestly confused, not attempting to be in any way combative.

Never heard of the Praetorians.

The praetorian guard were the Emperor's henchmen and guarded his life. Sometimes, they didn't do such a good job of it. One time, when one emperor supposedly was a madman and used to make constant jokes to one of his guards about having his way with the guard's wife, the emperor died from mysterious head hitting the stairs circumstances.

Most of the issues stemming from the Praetorian Guard had to do with money. So keep them well paid and they will probably behave.

Epyc Wynn:
Never heard of the Praetorians.

These guys.

Because the Praetorian Guard was the only military force allowed into Rome proper, and because Rome was the administrative center of the Empire, they often determined who the next Emperor would be, usually by killing the previous one. This status quo lasted about two centuries from Caligula's assassination up until Emperor Diocletian, who solved the problem by moving his administrative center to Nicomedia, which set the stage for the eventual partition of the Empire into Eastern and Western halves.

In context, the reference was intended to raise the possibility that the intelligence community might "go Praetorian" and try to either impeach the President or...well, you know. Liquidate his physical assets.

Major Tom:
Most of the issues stemming from the Praetorian Guard had to do with money. So keep them well paid and they will probably behave.

Yes and no.

In reality, no guard unit can realistically be paid enough to make them unbribable - because it would require annual salaries around the level of a bribe, and the cost would be astronomical.

After that, guards can be motivated by other factors, such as that some will love their country and be prepared to murder a leader they perceive is ruining it. Or if in a civil war they perceive the other guy is likely to win, they may murder their leader to earn the favour of the challenger. And so on.

Ah, I remember the good old days when everyone was raging about excessive use of executive orders when they were sent out for relatively small stuff...

While I don't agree with everything Trump does (I know, shocker) there are two things here that really tick me off. First is this:

Epyc Wynn:

He has taken steps to advance the construction of Dakota Access and Keystone XL pipelines, both of which have been heavily protested by Native Americans and public activists for their transportation of crude near aquifiers when the pipeline could easily be constructed in a different location.

Who cares if it could be built at a different location? It's not on a reserve (that was a lie by protesters), it's not on a burial ground (another lie), it wasn't near their water source (this one doesn't even make sense, you can't cover up the fact it's both downstream and that a different water source is used) and to top off just how stupid this entire protest purely for the sake of protesting was, there's already 2 pipelines in the exact same location.

Funny thing is this whole thing is yet another case of environmentalists playing themselves and harming the environment because the oil is being transported anyway, but so long as the pipeline is delayed it'll be transported by rail, which is more harmful for the environment and is also a greater hazard.

congratulations protesters, you continued the time honoured environmentalist tradition of making things worst just to pat yourselves on the back for a job well done.

Second thing that irks me is this:

Donald Trump has lied about there being a mass voter fraud of 3-5 million false votes, and this has been used as an excuse to promote voter ID laws in the U.S. even though nearly nobody in the entire U.S. actually fakes votes.

Funny as it may seem, white liberals are literally the only demographic in America that opposes voter I.D. laws. Which I'm not surprised by, but then again as a Canadian (or really, someone from any modern democracy that isn't the US) the concept of not having voter I.D. is a foreign one to me since the US is the only first world nation that doesn't use it.

Well, that's not entirely true now that Chairman Justin has made changes to our voting laws that won't last the next administration, but I guess even if it's only temporary one needs to make note of it.

And of course there is the worst executive action he has performed so far. Becoming president.

Well it could be worst. Better a man doing more to uphold his promises in his first week in office then his predecessor managed in 8 years, and better this then the war we'd be marching towards otherwise.

This timeline is certainly better then the nuclear hellscape the ones unfortunate enough to have elected Clinton are.

Agema:
Ah, I remember the good old days when everyone was raging about excessive use of executive orders when they were sent out for relatively small stuff...

And it's also funny to watch the same people who defended the overcentralization of executive power now lament the fact they allowed it to happen.

Why is it people can't seem to understand any barrier you remove to make your politics easier to pass applies to your opponent for when they inevitably come to power as well?

Agema:

Major Tom:
Most of the issues stemming from the Praetorian Guard had to do with money. So keep them well paid and they will probably behave.

Yes and no.

In reality, no guard unit can realistically be paid enough to make them unbribable - because it would require annual salaries around the level of a bribe, and the cost would be astronomical.

After that, guards can be motivated by other factors, such as that some will love their country and be prepared to murder a leader they perceive is ruining it. Or if in a civil war they perceive the other guy is likely to win, they may murder their leader to earn the favour of the challenger. And so on.

This is true, I probably should have said 'some' instead of most. It's just that the incidents I remember the most is that of Pertinax, and I'm pretty sure I remember part of Severus Alexander's assassination involved not raising pay (though I'd have to trawl through my lecture notes on that one).

'white liberals' are the only ones opposed to voter id laws? Source?

The reason liberals in general are opposed to voter id laws is because their sole aim is to make it harder for people to vote (usually people of lower socioeconomic status, of which minorities are disproportionately represented). It's hilariously ironic that as much as conservatives cry about regulations just being answers looking for a problem, the most glaring case of 'an answer looking for a problem' is voter id laws trying to combat voter fraud.

Jux:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-muslim-ban-refugees_us_58877244e4b096b4a2349927?ioficaiiz1xn06yldi&

Looks like he'll be taking his first step towards his 'muslim ban'.

Also, not an executive order, but has anyone noticed who he's putting at the head of the FCC? Pai doesn't exactly come off as a fan of net neutrality.

I love how alarmist people make it sound.

Restricting access to visas for refugees is not "banning muslims".

Here Comes Tomorrow:

Jux:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-muslim-ban-refugees_us_58877244e4b096b4a2349927?ioficaiiz1xn06yldi&

Looks like he'll be taking his first step towards his 'muslim ban'.

Also, not an executive order, but has anyone noticed who he's putting at the head of the FCC? Pai doesn't exactly come off as a fan of net neutrality.

I love how alarmist people make it sound.

Restricting access to visas for refugees is not "banning muslims".

Maybe try reading what I wrote. Here, I'll bold the relevant part.

Looks like he'll be taking his first step towards his 'muslim ban'.

Zontar:

Donald Trump has lied about there being a mass voter fraud of 3-5 million false votes, and this has been used as an excuse to promote voter ID laws in the U.S. even though nearly nobody in the entire U.S. actually fakes votes.

Funny as it may seem, white liberals are literally the only demographic in America that opposes voter I.D. laws. Which I'm not surprised by, but then again as a Canadian (or really, someone from any modern democracy that isn't the US) the concept of not having voter I.D. is a foreign one to me since the US is the only first world nation that doesn't use it.

Because the US is a vey strange country where many many people don't have a proper way to prove their identity. Something about freedom and tradition and strange stuff.

And because getting some personal identification costs money and works as an additional barrier to voting. If someone does not care too much, they won't pay extra just to be able to vote. This hurts obviously poorer people more.

And because somehow every time there is an election coming where voter I.D. is actually confirmed, it sometimes becomes strangely difficult for certain population groups to get an ID card in time.

So yes, in the USA voter ID laws somehow change the voter composition, not by keeping illegal voters away, but by making it harder, more expensive and more tedious for some voter groups to actually vote.

Most other countries don't have this problem. Because citizens there have an ID. Just another case of American exceptionalism. All the other first world countries don't require a proof of identity which is not available without more than minimal effort.

Satinavian:

Most other countries don't have this problem. Because citizens there have an ID. Just another case of American exceptionalism. All the other first world countries don't require a proof of identity which is not available without more than minimal effort.

I understand that the US is odd (after all a small minority is the one currently writing the laws on the books regarding voter ID) but how does one possibly function without a form of identification? How does one, say, file taxes? Open a bank account? Rent a place? To get government handouts? Or any of the countless other things that aren't possible without ID. Is the homeless problem and black market for basic necessities of living including housing really that big?

Satinavian:
Because the US is a vey strange country where many many prople don't have a proper way to prove their identity. Something about freedom and tradition and strange stuff.

And because getting some perosonal identificaation costs money and works as an additional barrier to voting. If someone does not care too much, they won't pay extra just to be able to vote. This hurts obviously poorer people more.

And because somehow every time there is an election coming where voter I.D. is actually confirmed, it sometimes becomes strangely difficult for certain population groups to get an ID card in time.

So yes, in the USA voter ID laws somehow change the voter composition, not by keeping illegal voters away, but by making it harder, more expensive and more tedious for some voter groups to actually vote.

Most other countries don't have this problem. Because citizens there have an ID. Just another case of American exceptionalism. All the other first world countries don't require a proof of identity which is not available without more than minimal effort.

That's a thing I never understood, the democrats shouldn't go against laws for voter IDs since it just makes them look corrupt, they should go for a country wide plan for regularized picture IDs.

Jux:

Here Comes Tomorrow:

Jux:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-muslim-ban-refugees_us_58877244e4b096b4a2349927?ioficaiiz1xn06yldi&

Looks like he'll be taking his first step towards his 'muslim ban'.

Also, not an executive order, but has anyone noticed who he's putting at the head of the FCC? Pai doesn't exactly come off as a fan of net neutrality.

I love how alarmist people make it sound.

Restricting access to visas for refugees is not "banning muslims".

Maybe try reading what I wrote. Here, I'll bold the relevant part.

Looks like he'll be taking his first step towards his 'muslim ban'.

You're stil being incredibly alarmist

@Zontar

Well, i don't actually live there, so my practical experience is limited, but in this point the USA is different to most other modern countries. It leads regularly to problems when doing buissness there and suddenly realizing that many things you take for granted for smooth transactions just don't work.

@Inu-kun

Yes. But for many Americans this is seen as overreaching gouvernment trying to control the citizens and taking away their freedom. It is deemed to unpopular to solve the problem this way so the Democrats don't go this route.

Here Comes Tomorrow:
I love how alarmist people make it sound.

Restricting access to visas for refugees is not "banning muslims".

It kinda...is that, though. Like, "banning Muslims" is an oversimplification, but Trump has essentially locked down asylum seeker claims coming from Syria, which is a predominantly (though not entirely) Muslim country.

Zontar:
Funny as it may seem, white liberals are literally the only demographic in America that opposes voter I.D. laws. Which I'm not surprised by, but then again as a Canadian (or really, someone from any modern democracy that isn't the US) the concept of not having voter I.D. is a foreign one to me since the US is the only first world nation that doesn't use it.

I take offence to the implication that Australia is not a first world country.

Australian Parliamentary Library:
With the exception of Queensland state elections, there is currently no requirement in Australia for a voter on the electoral roll to produce proof of their identity at the polling station in order to be allowed to vote. But over the years various Australian jurisdictions have trialled voter ID schemes. Of these, it appears that none have resulted in follow-up action.

The way it works in Australia is that you register on the electoral roll, which you can do online or with the AEC by providing your driver's license, passport number, or someone else already on the roll who can confirm your identiy. Once you're registered on that electoral roll, you're set for every future election unless you move to another seat and want to cast your votes for that seat. You can do the whole thing on voting day if you want, it doesn't take long at all.

On voting day, you just go to the polling place and tick your name off the electoral roll. They ask you your name, your address, and whether you've voted already, and that's that. It takes about five minutes.

The situation in the US is different for a bunch of reasons. States that require photo identification at the polling place often end up excluding people who don't have a driver's license, i.e. people too poor to own a car. Then there's the more blatant shenanigans, like not allowing same-day registration, limiting access to polling places in areas more likely to vote for the other side...and then there's the fact that voting is held on a Tuesday and it's not even a goddamn holiday. There's a ton of examples.

The problem isn't nearly as bad in Canada, as I understand it, but in Arizona in 2016, some people were waiting in line for five hours to cast their vote after 70% of the state's polling booths were shut down before the election by the Republican governor. That's just fucking shady. If you ask me, partisan state governments shouldn't be tasked with overseeing federal elections. It's like hiring the fox to keep track of your chickens. There should be a bipartisan federal electoral commission running the process.

This is a great off-the-cuff speech from Obama elaborating the problems with voter suppression in America.

Satinavian:

@Inu-kun

Yes. But for many Americans this is seen as overreaching gouvernment trying to control the citizens and taking away their freedom. It is deemed to unpopular to solve the problem this way so the Democrats don't go this route.

I don't really get why, though. It is simply ridiculous to think that the government does not have a photo of a civilian in store already. A loud minority shouldn't screw everyone else in having IDs.

Zontar:
While I don't agree with everything Trump does (I know, shocker) there are two things here that really tick me off. First is this:

Epyc Wynn:

He has taken steps to advance the construction of Dakota Access and Keystone XL pipelines, both of which have been heavily protested by Native Americans and public activists for their transportation of crude near aquifiers when the pipeline could easily be constructed in a different location.

Who cares if it could be built at a different location? It's not on a reserve (that was a lie by protesters), it's not on a burial ground (another lie), it wasn't near their water source (this one doesn't even make sense, you can't cover up the fact it's both downstream and that a different water source is used) and to top off just how stupid this entire protest purely for the sake of protesting was, there's already 2 pipelines in the exact same location.

Funny thing is this whole thing is yet another case of environmentalists playing themselves and harming the environment because the oil is being transported anyway, but so long as the pipeline is delayed it'll be transported by rail, which is more harmful for the environment and is also a greater hazard.

congratulations protesters, you continued the time honoured environmentalist tradition of making things worst just to pat yourselves on the back for a job well done.

Second thing that irks me is this:

Donald Trump has lied about there being a mass voter fraud of 3-5 million false votes, and this has been used as an excuse to promote voter ID laws in the U.S. even though nearly nobody in the entire U.S. actually fakes votes.

Funny as it may seem, white liberals are literally the only demographic in America that opposes voter I.D. laws. Which I'm not surprised by, but then again as a Canadian (or really, someone from any modern democracy that isn't the US) the concept of not having voter I.D. is a foreign one to me since the US is the only first world nation that doesn't use it.

Well, that's not entirely true now that Chairman Justin has made changes to our voting laws that won't last the next administration, but I guess even if it's only temporary one needs to make note of it.

And of course there is the worst executive action he has performed so far. Becoming president.

Well it could be worst. Better a man doing more to uphold his promises in his first week in office then his predecessor managed in 8 years, and better this then the war we'd be marching towards otherwise.

This timeline is certainly better then the nuclear hellscape the ones unfortunate enough to have elected Clinton are.

Gonna need a source for your claim that the burial ground was a lie.

inu-kun:

Satinavian:

@Inu-kun

Yes. But for many Americans this is seen as overreaching gouvernment trying to control the citizens and taking away their freedom. It is deemed to unpopular to solve the problem this way so the Democrats don't go this route.

I don't really get why, though. It is simply ridiculous to think that the government does not have a photo of a civilian in store already. A loud minority shouldn't screw everyone else in having IDs.

It's because "That's how they getcha man!" Should be printed on the currency in the US. Course only suckers use money. That's how they getcha! Buy gold!

Zontar:

And it's also funny to watch the same people who defended the overcentralization of executive power now lament the fact they allowed it to happen.

Why is it people can't seem to understand any barrier you remove to make your politics easier to pass applies to your opponent for when they inevitably come to power as well?

I do not know whether executive power has concentrated in the executive in the USA recently. My suspicion is not, as the US Constitution is pretty rigid and well defined. Perhaps even the opposite has occurred if we go far enough back, as I've heard of instances of pre-war presidents really throwing their weight around.

I'm a great believer that political problems tend to be institutional rather than personal. The tragic reality is that both left and right have turned a blind eye to executive orders whenever it's their guy in power. I recall Democrats furious when GWB was showering the USA with them, and then the Republicans were furious when Obama used them, and neither seemed to up with the cosistent answer of... perhaps campaigning to curtail executive powers. Although given the gridlock that permeates the US political system, perhaps not - otherwise things that needed to be done wouldn't get done.

Nor, to the best of my knowledge, have executive orders significantly increased in number. Potentially they are increasingly being used to circumvent what is normally under the purview of Congress, although this may be a symptom of the US political system becoming more dysfunctionally partisan and unco-operative.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here