I found this article by Cato Institute, of all places, interesting as it criticizes the Republican rhetoric about the constitution as possibly…deeply misinformed.
I love that throughout this entire piece talking about how the Republican candidates are all either ignorant of, or antagonistic towards certain parts of the constitution, the author never mentions that 6 of them said they’d support Trump as their party’s nominee even if he was convicted of seditious acts.
The entire party is a joke. One long, weird, unfunny joke.
It’s just patriotic rhetoric to appeal to their core demographic, and I think we know from their past form upholding their own constitution is not the Republican party’s main priority. I’d hope that at least their supporters who do care about the constitution - which people died for - can smell this bs a mile off.
But it’s true the whole thing about The President is not actually a dictator (although certain recent ones might have behaved that way). They still have to follow process and can’t make things disappear overnight.
I’m in the UK and our right wing politicians sometimes do a similar thing with history (industrial revolution, Churchill, Empire(!), etc), although that doesn’t work so well these days because they need to be attractive a youth vote. And similarly I think Boris Jonson thought he was going to be a dictator and instead found himself beholden to parliamentary laws, even ones he’d created himself and was quite shocked about the whole thing.
They all just want to be Putin deep down!
Both parties do this. This is nothing unique to the Republicans.
Both parties abuse executive orders.
THe problem is congress has not acted like a congress for a very long time. That is why the court keep pushing cases back like Roe since Congress should be the one to make a law.
Yet both sides just twiddle their thumbs.
Cato isn’t a Republican group to start, but even then, you should be able to point out flaws on your own side.
Right now, you are hearing more rhetoric than anything. Some of the points in the article are silly.
An example is
But for all of their claims of fidelity to the Constitution, the candidates sure got a lot wrong about it. Vivek Ramaswamy, for instance, said in his closing remarks that the Constitution (ratified in 1788), is “what won us the American Revolution” (which ended 5 years earlier, in 1783).
Vivek wasn’t trying to speak literally but inspirational in his message.
The candidates also seemed to misunderstand the scope of presidential power when they suggested they’d invade Mexico as a response to rising opioid abuse, which they blame on Mexican cartels. DeSantis said he’d “send troops” into Mexico to take out fentanyl labs and drug cartel operations. Pence referred to “partner[ing] with the Mexican military” to “hunt down and destroy the cartels.” And Ramaswamy, Hutchison, and Tim Scott all alluded to using military resources to stop the flow of fentanyl at the border.
They could use military power but none of them would. It would be wildly unpopular. It is more rhetoric but I have no idea who they are focusing on since I don’t know anyone asking for this. We can solve this by just protecting our border and inspecting things that enter or through trade sanctions.
Right now is the time to watch and see who says the craziest shit. None of them are appealing to me. Maybe Hayley and possibly Christie.
Vivek wasn’t trying to speak literally but inspirational in his message.
Aren’t we passed this yet? When people tell you what they believe or what they’re going to do, believe them.
There is a notable difference in political aspirational rhetoric from years past. Do you think McCain would’ve got the relationship between the Constitution and the American Revolution wrong? Or obliquely suggested a Mexican invasion to stop drug cartels?
Vivek is the last dog in the fight. So he’s trying to build his brand.
The Mexican invasion I just heard tonight.
I mean, democrats love everything in the constitution or just the parts they like as well? It’s pretty rare to find someone who truly supports every aspect of the constitution. And even if they do in theory they still have their own parts that they think are more paramount and others that need to be watered down.