Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
Newt Gingrich raised a point the other day that requires repeating:
This campaign cannot be only about the presidency. We need to pick up at least 12 seats in the U.S. Senate and 30 or 40 more seats in the House, because if you are serious about repealing Obamacare, you have to be serious about building a big enough majority in the legislative branch that you could actually in the first 90 days pass the legislation. ... So I just think it's very important to understand, it's not about what one person in America does. It's about what the American people do. And that requires a senatorial majority, as well as a presidency.
I'd like to see more recognition--from all the candidates--that this is the President's job:
Section. 2.
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.
And there's a reason that's Article II, not Article I.
- Comment (19)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
Comments :
Mar '11
Re: Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
That's, like, from the Constitution, right? Oh, that thing isn't really binding it's like a 100 years old and really confusing.
Dec '10
Re: Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
Super confusing. With any luck a bright non-throne seeking (i.e.not Gingrich) president could fill all the the head of departments like the EPA with a large group of interns armed with industrial sized document shredders to rid us of the regulations that fill feet of book shelf space. And after a year when those hard working students return to class or head out into the world looking for jobs, they could be replaced with a small bank of receptionist that only speak Aramaic, and a large mechanical robot that only has two functions: 1) Impressing paper with a large rubber stamp that states "approved" for the FDA and whatever the has replaced Minerals etc etc post cocaine/sex scandal and 2) a machete that deftly slices red tape (metaphorically of course, I'm still working out the details) for the EPA and all its ilk.
Edited on Aug 14, 2011 at 1:15amMar '11
Re: Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
Speaking of winning the Congress, troubling poll out this past week suggesting that Democrats, nationwide, enjoy a slight edge on Republicans on the generic Congressional ballot. (All the caveats apply to this polling data).
If this is any sort of accurate leading indicator, it suggests that contrary to a number of rosy accounts, the 2012 election is going to be a tooth and nail fight across the board for the Republican Party. We'd better have candidates ready to do battle on those terms, and who can stand up to the scrutiny.
Re: Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
Crow's Nest: Speaking of winning the Congress, troubling poll out this past week suggesting that Democrats, nationwide, enjoy a slight edge on Republicans on the generic Congressional ballot. (All the caveats apply to this polling data).
If this is any sort of accurate leading indicator, it suggests that contrary to a number of rosy accounts, the 2012 election is going to be a tooth and nail fight across the board for the Republican Party. We'd better have candidates ready to do battle on those terms, and who can stand up to the scrutiny. · Aug 14 at 1:18am
As often, Crow's Nest, I agree with you.
Dec '10
Re: Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
Crow's Nest: Speaking of winning the Congress, troubling poll out this past week suggesting that Democrats, nationwide, enjoy a slight edge on Republicans on the generic Congressional ballot. (All the caveats apply to this polling data).
If this is any sort of accurate leading indicator, it suggests that contrary to a number of rosy accounts, the 2012 election is going to be a tooth and nail fight across the board for the Republican Party. We'd better have candidates ready to do battle on those terms, and who can stand up to the scrutiny. · Aug 14 at 1:18am
I think this year may be one in which message may trump party. If the presidential election can do the job of showcasing how Obamacare would further hinder a recovery-not to mention the quality of health care in the U.S., we don't need Republican replacements, just Democrats running for re-election based on their intent to replace it with genuine reform.
If Rubio can push reform in Florida, it can happen anywhere.
Edited on Aug 14, 2011 at 1:49amOct '10
Re: Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
Beasley
I think this year may be one in which message may trump party. If the presidential election can do the job of showcasing how Obamacare would further hinder a recovery-not to mention the quality of health care in the U.S., we don't need Republican replacements, just Democrats running for re-election based on their intent to replace it with genuine reform.
If Rubio can push reform in Florida, it can happen anywhere. · Aug 14 at 1:46am
Edited on Aug 14 at 01:49 am
Rely on Democrats’ "intent"? How about this: let’s raise taxes now because Democrats intend to cut spending in the future. How’s that worked out for us in the past? And not to put too fine a point on it . . . Rubio is a Republican.
Jul '11
Re: Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
Newt's right, of course. The Republicans do need to win those 12 Senate seats and solidify their hold on the House. But that's why we need to focus our attention so intently on the party's standard bearer. A strong, articulate candidate that effectively promotes and generates enthusiasm for conservative ideas will have ripple effects on every other contest in the country. If such a candidate emerges early it could even help with the recruitment of higher quality candidates for those races.
Unlike many of those on the left, we are rightfully skeptical of the ability of any president to affect the changes we'd like to see. Our attention on the presidency is therefore not a result of a simplistic view of politics, the one in which a savior arrives to stop the oceans from rising, for instance, but is instead a practical approach to achieving a more broad-based victory. The importance of coat-tails seems to have diminished in recent elections, but it's impossible to see a weak presidential candidate generating the enthusiasm necessary to win all of those other, also critical, races.
Edited on Aug 14, 2011 at 5:49amMay '10
Re: Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
Trust me...if a Republican wins this thing, he's gonna sweep a lot of republicans in with him...just like 2010, it's going to be a nationalized election. The Dems have gone all in with Dear Leader...they will sink or swim with him. If they sink, we get a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.
Jun '11
Re: Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
It's very important to note that the Gallup poll referenced above is of "Registered Voters" which is far less meaningful than a Rasmussen poll of "Likely Voters". At the time of the last election, when Republicans made historic gains, Rasmussen's polling showed the generic split to be Democrat 49% and Republicans just 39%. Fast forward to their latest numbers, August 7, 2011 and R's are ahead 41%-39% amongst "likely voters". Those are the sort of poll numbers that produce gains more like what Claire is urging-- 12 points better than the huge gains of 2010.
Also, amongst all likely voters Rasmussen finds that more people, 42%, think the average Tea Party citizen understands the nation's issues better than their Congressman (34% think the Congressman knows better). http://urlshort.me/316 An interesting tidbit for those who might think the TP is a problem for R's.
Re: Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
Amen, Claire. Amen.
Re: Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
Re: Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
Absolutely -- especially if that Republican nominee runs a campaign appealing to first principles and hammers home those principles in his speeches, which Perry might well do.
Jul '10
Re: Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
Because, dear Claire, ever since Lincoln (the most egregious example, but Adams set the precedent), the President has ignored Article 2 Section 1.
Dec '10
Re: Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
The Tea Party is the answer.
May '10
Re: Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
That's why politicians of both parties like to talk about our "broken" system. I think even Professional Republicans yearn for a parliamentary system with it's (semi) automatic governing majorities in the legislative branch. As George Will and Charles Krauthammer have both pointed out it's the politicians that have the problem, our Constitution is working as it was designed to.
Feb '11
Re: Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
The matter of foreign entanglements may also be an issue.
Much may depend on body counts, at home and abroad. A truck bomb at a high school football game might change domestic expectations.
While we've won two battles, it's not clear we're winning the war. And as for the battles won -- a decade ago -- they're victories only as long as we're permanent residents, and willing not just to buy and install toilets for the defeated, but also to make the locals hygienic after they do their business.
And meanwhile, the pathologies of the region grow daily more virulent. Not even Allah knows what it'll be like when the last semblances of nation states and modern economies have disappeared from the Arab world and Pakistan, or when once Sunnis and Shiites get to hating one another more than they love selling oil. Mullahs with nukes only make it the more interesting.
Aug '11
Re: Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
I think Beasely's joke about Gingrich went under-appreciated. I mean, Gingrich wouldn't' want all the focus off of the presidency if he had any chance of winning it, right? The presidency only ceases to be important when someone else would beat him in a competition to hold it.
Anyway, once comments get this numerous, the stuff on the bottom gets a little redundant or overlooked.
The only contribution I want to add is that presidential candidates matter more than Gingrich argues simply because the down-ticket candidates depend on the strength of the top of the ticket. Sure, vetting decent congressional candidates matters. Who said it didn't? Well, some in the Tea Party did by stressing ideological purity over experience and electability, as if the two were mutually exclusive.
We have to remember the Rubios AND the O'Donnells in the coming 2012 elections. Human nature has an ingrained confirmation bias, in which we tend to forget the events that run contrary to what we believe. O'Donnell should be the first person we all think of if we want to avoid losing. That seat was in the bag.
Edited on Aug 14, 2011 at 9:10amFeb '11
Re: Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
Texas figured this out by 1876, when it rewrote its constitution precisely in order to really, really break the government. If the U.S. constitution was based on distrust, ours was based on paranoia.
Jan '11
Re: Why So Much Focus on the Presidency?
Actually, Claire, I'd like to see our candidate for President focus on beating Obama, and setting forth a clear, unambiguous message for Constitutional conservatism.
What I'd like to see, instead, is the rest of the people not running for President within the GOP and the conservative movement focus on getting not just the President elected, but ensuring that 2012 is a continuation of the wave of 2010.
As one of the speakers at Redstate said, 2012 is the second half of the game. We cannot and will not let up.