If Obama didn’t push for ACA, we would not be at this point we are now. Even if he did not succeed to get everyone on board, he moved the needle. The conversion is steering in the right direction.
And like the other replier said, the president sets the guidance for congress and their party. They make it clear what they want to pass and what won’t pass, then congress will work towards those goals/ compromises. Ex, If the president clearly indicates she is pro choice, any anti abortion legislation is going to be vetoed so no one is spending political capital trying to push for it, grandstand aside.
It’s one thing to say what you stand for, it’s another thing entirely to say you will make something happen. This is what makes people apathetic in voting because it feels like they make promises they have no intention on keeping. Harris supports codifying abortion and I’m all fucking here for it but she has no power to get that through congress, only to talk it up and not veto it.
Btw, this entire time you seem to have not noticed this article is over five years old and Kamala doesn’t support M4A, or any of her somewhat progressive stances from back then…
This is what makes people apathetic in voting
Yes.
People were moderately enthused about Kamala when we assumed she hadn’t done a 180 on everything people liked about her.
Her recent moves to the right will depress turnout.
Again, you’re getting hung up on the wrong thing. You seem to misunderstand what the actual role of the President is, which is mostly administrative. If you’ve been thinking every President has been doing things themselves, you’ve completely missed what the job is.
The actual governing powers of the role is almost non-existent aside from specific Executive Powers which have only come into existence in recent history, and are constantly assaulted by the minority party and courts.
If Obama didn’t push for ACA, we would not be at this point we are now. Even if he did not succeed to get everyone on board, he moved the needle. The conversion is steering in the right direction.
And like the other replier said, the president sets the guidance for congress and their party. They make it clear what they want to pass and what won’t pass, then congress will work towards those goals/ compromises. Ex, If the president clearly indicates she is pro choice, any anti abortion legislation is going to be vetoed so no one is spending political capital trying to push for it, grandstand aside.
It’s one thing to say what you stand for, it’s another thing entirely to say you will make something happen. This is what makes people apathetic in voting because it feels like they make promises they have no intention on keeping. Harris supports codifying abortion and I’m all fucking here for it but she has no power to get that through congress, only to talk it up and not veto it.
Btw, this entire time you seem to have not noticed this article is over five years old and Kamala doesn’t support M4A, or any of her somewhat progressive stances from back then…
Yes.
People were moderately enthused about Kamala when we assumed she hadn’t done a 180 on everything people liked about her.
Her recent moves to the right will depress turnout.
Again, you’re getting hung up on the wrong thing. You seem to misunderstand what the actual role of the President is, which is mostly administrative. If you’ve been thinking every President has been doing things themselves, you’ve completely missed what the job is.
The actual governing powers of the role is almost non-existent aside from specific Executive Powers which have only come into existence in recent history, and are constantly assaulted by the minority party and courts.