Anyone who supports Trump, is against democracy

Post Reply New Topic

Trump is using Veto to ignore the Congress.

First of all, how can you say Trump is a democrat (I'm not referring to the political party, but the type of government)?
He acts against the majority of the Congress!

Secondly, why should a president have so much power over any parliament? If you're a believer in democracy all power should be in the hands of the parliament. In the case of U.S. all legislative power should be in the Congress.

Trump is anti-democracy.

Anyone who supports Donald Trump is AGAINST DEMOCRACY!

The President of the United States has the power to veto any bill. I'm not understanding your point. How is Trump against democracy simple by utilizing a power that was bestowed upon him by the U.S Constitution?

Then the constitution is against democracy.

I don't understand why any single individual should have so much power.

Does it apply to every president?

Didn't Obama along with previous president do the same thing for other purposes?

If you check polls you will find that the majority of the population agrees that we need stronger border deffenise/security, that's the pupose of a wall. Being the majority of the population supports it, I would say it's congress who is against democracy on this one.

One, democracy is when the people vote directly for governing laws. Representational democracy is when people elect members to vote on laws for them. A democratically elected President is no less valid a representative of democracy than democratically elected congress members. Only the scale is different.

Two, any president can veto any bill any time he/she wants to. That is a constitutionally prescribed power. They can also issue executive orders to enforce the laws. That is also constitutionally prescribed. Congress gave the President powers to declare emergencies, and Congress if they were so willing could take them away.

Three, Congress can promptly tell the President to go to Hell any time they want provided they actually agreed on anything. Congress has INFINITELY more power than the president, they just never wield it as one. If all 535 voted as a block there's very little in our government they can't do.

Four, I agree that running governments through executive action and emergency is bad precedent. It was bad when Obama did it, and it is bad when Trump does it. Unfortunately too many people are only against it when the "other guy" does it.

Five, the border is a serious problem, but its been that way for decades and is no more and emergency today than it was 2 years ago, or 10 years ago. I wish our government would address this problem, but it needs to be done through congress.

Hyperpartisanship is killing our government, one norm at a time.

You're darn right I'm against democracy, and I thank the Founders every day that I don't live in one.

Long live the Republic!

Democracy, as it is currently practiced almost everywhere where there is democracy, is not so much a form of government but a form of legitimisation.
Trump and congress and the other government bodies are democratically legitimised to do whatever the hell they want - and if there's a law in the way - well, they make the laws, don't they?

Except that majority isn't enough to change a veto. You need at least 2/3 majority.

Of course. I don't understand why Obama, Trump or whoever, should be granted the right to veto.

Why should any individual have so much power and why should only 2/3 majority be able to overturn the veto? 50.1 % should do it!

Now you're being stupid. A Republic says nothing about whether it is a democracy or autocracy.
A Republic is opposed to a monarchy, and both can be democracies and both can be autocracies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic

However, this also kind of means then that what's the point in having a president?

Any US president has this power, so how is this specific to Trump?

^^ I agree with the last two points.

Countries shouldn't have Presidents unless the role is ceremonial (and even then...) or the population is very small. Much better to have a proportionally-elected parliament, or failing that, a non-proportional elected parliament, or even a parliament chosen through sortition.

It’s called checks and balances and I bet you were glad Obama had it when Congress was majority republican and will be again when it is with a democrat president.

Mob rule is bad. If there’s 10 people and 6 of them vote to kill one of the others so they can take his stuff, is that good? Mean that’s over half. So they can do whatever they want right? Thank god we are a republic not democracy.

Senators are state elected representatives. House representatives are locally elected representatives. The president is the nationally elected representative.

The US government was designed to have competing wings of power to prevent a tyranny of majority from forming. If 51% of the country wants to pass a law that would be bad for the country the president as the national representative can veto it. If 67% of the country wants to pass a law over the presidents objections, there is enough of a consensus to overrule the president.

In earlier times this worked quite well because there wasn't hyperpartisanship and the president did not have nearly as much influence over the members of their party as they do today. Nowadays a tyranny of the majority can still be achieved if a unified government is elected.

The courts still strike down laws that are in violation of higher law (the constitution for laws, laws for executive actions, etc.) However, court justices are nominated by the president and approved by the senate. Hence the three branches are interdependent on one another.

I really wish congress would take the opportunity to wrest some power back from the presidency. But too many republicans see this as about border security than about emergency powers.

No system works perfectly. The US constitutional republic is the oldest of its kind and has endured for 230 years. We have another 240 years to go to match the Roman Republic as the longest lasting non-monarchy government.