politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Reagan was diagnosed with Alzheimer's a few years after leaving office, but his son said the symptoms were there in 84, before he started his second term.
It's like a time honored tradition around here
Yeah. Past presidents have done a much better job of hiding it but many (most?) experts believe reagan was pretty out of it by the middle of his second term, if not sooner. And I've seen a few deep dives that argue similar for bush jr but that gets into the other problem.
Our geritocracy mostly predate the modern internet and 24/7 news cycle (which is arguably why both parties are so focused on the olds). So you have people like Biden and dubyah who both have a VERY long history of speech impediments and "word salad" that predated their infirmity because people did not care back in the 80s and 90s and even 00s. But also... it masked said infirmity. Again, I've seen deep dives that make claims as to when Biden went senile but that is the same "body language" analysis that the vast majority of the audience has no way to assess the claims of.
I guess, my view is that we aren't electing a single person to lead the country. That is just completely unreasonable due to the wide breadth of knowledge that would be required. What we are electing is someone charismatic with good judgment who knows how to surround themselves with experts in all the required fields. So if that person becomes unable to fulfill their duty... it theoretically doesn't matter.
That said, it would also be REALLY fucking nice to have someone who isn't drooling while staring into the corner in office.
I agree, but to me I just wish we could have the branches do their actual jobs. The president shouldn't be doing anything but executing legislation that's previously written. I don't think they should be pushing for new legislation, concluding what old legislation means, or pushing any agenda, they should be/ are a glorified cop when it comes to the internal aspects of our country. International relations are another subject. We have 535 people making legislation. 1 person shouldn't ever have say over them, as they are our individualized representatives designated for their purposes, and are a completely different branch of government. When the president says, I don't think this legislation means that, the courts can take a look at it, but they shouldn't be doing that either. It should go back to the legislature, and they should say no actions can be performed until we tell you how high to jump bitch. Now sit and stay or we'll throw you out of that office and charge you with treason.
They are public servants
I think the President SHOULD be arguing/advocating for legislature AS a representative of The People. I don't like that the POTUS is often the face of their political party (that is the Speaker Of The House/Word for Minority Leader) but it is also a consequence of a two party system (which is the end state of most representative Democracies but...).
But it should be done through talking/pressuring politicians and exercising vetoes. Not through kingly decrees under the guise of "I guess we are at war with fentanyl?"
But I acknowledge I grew up with The West Wing (and fully believe Veep is a much more realistic portrayal of government) so I still have an idealized view of what a leader SHOULD do.
If the Presidents stayed in their roles, the people would follow their congressmembers/senators if they thought things werent how they liked. It wouldn't be a giant publicity show, because you'd have 435 people with a vote that's equal, and 100 in the other house. Making 270 people popular is much harder, and when they can't count for more than everyone else, their standing doesn't "demand" as much respect.
Right now it's the executive branch manipulating the rest, which is rediculous
The symptoms were perfectly obvious when he was in office.