It’s funny that you say that, because that’s exactly what a president is supposed to be.
“He presides over the executive branch.”
It’s supposed to be the most boring name, to contrast with the idea of having a king-like leader.
It turns out human anthropology resists such ideal concepts. But the government does function without the need of a highly competent president -The current president’s dementia is a case in point (recall the special counsel said he wasn’t mentally fit enough to be guilty of any wrongdoing).
I had hoped that 4 years of Trump + 4 years of Biden would be enough for people to realize that maybe the president is not as important as made out to be.
But just the opposite has happened.
Which is funny because half the country would vote for a lamp post if it was running against Trump, and vice versa.
> maybe the president is not as important as made out to be
I mean this just isn't the case. A certain president was very responsible for our current Supreme Court and there are real consequences for everyday Americans.
The south has went bonkers with anti-abortion legislation, there was an attempted coup, and also the President is now ultimately and completely immune from consequences. Did we all just collectively forget this happened?
This doesn't even touch on the right's future plans for America. Like, for example, abolishing the department of education. Again - what do you think will happen in the South if that comes to fruition?
People who are disconnected from this are so from a place of privilege. It's easy to say "everything is fine" when, because of life circumstances, you will never be the target of anything ever.
I have young women in my life and I've seen firsthand how this has affected them. I know drag queens and I've seen how much more hate they get. I know a teacher and she is terrified about the future (or lack thereof) of public education.
> A certain president was very responsible for our current Supreme Court
Do you really think Trump had even heard of the judge names he picked? Also, do you think Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio would have picked "good" justices? I think you're giving Trump too much personal credit here.
Same for most of the other issues you highlighted, which I don't disagree with, but at the same time I don't think Ron DeSantis or any other candidate would have been a stark difference from Trump.
"eliminating the Department [of Education] is hardly a new notion. Republicans have been calling for its abolition pretty much since its inception in 1979. In 1980, the year after Jimmy Carter fulfilled a campaign pledge to the National Education Association by creating the Department, Ronald Reagan pledged to dismantle it"
"National figures’ promising to abolish the Department (and then not doing so) has been a staple of GOP politics and party platforms for four decades. In 1994, Newt Gingrich’s “Contract with America” advocated eliminating the Department. In 1996, Republican presidential nominee Bob Dole did the same. In 2011, the GOP presidential debates featured an infamous moment when ED was one of three cabinet departments that Rick Perry promised to eliminate—and one of the two he could recall"
In my opinion, we're not going to fix much by electing a "good" president. We've built a tower of shit and putting a ribbon on top isn't going to make it smell good. We spend so much time and energy arguing about the color of the next ribbon, and all that does is distract us from the shit pile.
> I think you're giving Trump too much personal credit here
Yeah I think you're right - it's more so his party.
> I don't think Ron DeSantis or any other candidate would have been a stark difference from Trump
Yeah probably not (and maybe worse even).
> we're not going to fix much by electing a "good" president
Probably not, but a blue president won't abolish the department of education. Nor would they instate a requirement that all government employees must pass an exam proving they're conservative (yes, real).
The problem is we have two right-leaning party. The moderate one, the dems, who do almost nothing. And the far-right one, which is dangerous. Like... actively looking to make everyone's lives worse at the behest of corporations and the ultra-wealthy, and then to top it off, enforce religious values and good morals.
It's a shitty situation, but in my opinion an easy choice. At least currently. The repubs have gotten much more radical in the past decade IMO.
“He presides over the executive branch.”
It’s supposed to be the most boring name, to contrast with the idea of having a king-like leader.
It turns out human anthropology resists such ideal concepts. But the government does function without the need of a highly competent president -The current president’s dementia is a case in point (recall the special counsel said he wasn’t mentally fit enough to be guilty of any wrongdoing).