- Perhaps the problem is that claims of “mandates” create political instability, and that’s what makes voters cynical about government;
- Especially when mandate claimers promise things they can’t possibly deliver, like Musk promising to slash the budget by $2 trillion;
- How Trump and the Republicans, far from following Constitutional norms, want to sidestep them at every opportunity;
- And what conservatives are really concerned about, when they rail against transgender rights.
From a few days ago; it was already apparent.
Slate, Jim Newell, 20 Nov 2024: Republicans Should Probably Cool It With the “Mandate” Talk, subtitled “Trump’s popular vote win may not be what it seems.”
And many powerful Republicans are playing fast and loose with a dangerous word: mandate.
“We are ready to deliver on America’s mandate in the next Congress,” House Speaker Mike Johnson said at a House GOP press conference the week after the election.
“A clear mandate for change from the American people,” Elon Musk posted on Nov. 16, after Trump had crossed the 76 million vote threshold.
…A ”mandate” discussion arrives shortly after each presidential election. It is always frustrating. It’s treated as a binary question—mandate or no mandate??—as if there is a certain numerical threshold from which one crosses into the other. If the winner’s popular vote and Electoral College margins were above the subjective Mandate Line, then we are to suppose he has the public’s blessing to do whatever he wants. If they’re below the Mandate Line, then buddy? You’d better watch your step.
I’m reminded of the article cited yesterday that blames the rise of fascism partly on the inherent flaws of democracy —
Whipsawing policy as governments change hands. A tendency for opposition parties to blame the government for everything in their struggle for power, resulting in widespread cynicism toward government altogether. A growing popular suspicion of expertise.
— because whenever one side wins, it can claim a “mandate” to undo everything the previous administration did. There’s no sense of stability, especially when one side disavows the principles they supposedly swore oaths to uphold.
\\\
Especially when that side promises things it can’t possibly deliver.
Vox, Dylan Matthews, 24 Nov 2024: Why Elon Musk can never balance the budget, in one chart, subtitled “Elon Musk wants to slash trillions in ‘waste.’ Good luck, buddy!”
Where in that chart is there $2 *trillion* to cut? Of course Musk bought Twitter and slashed employment and ruined the platform. And now he’s speculating on buying MSNBC; if he does, he’ll ruin that too. (Full disclosure: I have a Twitter/X account but haven’t logged in there in years; and I very rarely watch MSNBC.) Can he be stopped?
That said, Musk could very easily kill NASA, which conservatives have always considered frivolous. (Because NASA is ultimately about long-term thinking.)
NY Times, Neel V. Patel, 22 Nov 2024: Will Musk Be the Death of NASA?
Especially since Musk wants to run his own space program! Aren’t there ethical rules about this sort of thing?? (Full disclosure: for anyone reading this blog who doesn’t know, I worked for an aerospace firm for 30 years that did mostly contract work for NASA, including the space shuttle and the space station. I wrote software that monitored the space shuttle main engines, at the beginning of that career. More to the point, the achievements of NASA are among the greatest of mankind, and they’re one of the few things nations around the world admire the US for.)
\\\
Trump wants to sidestep rules and norms wherever possible.
NY Times, David French, 24 Nov 2024: Donald Trump Thinks He Won’t Have Enough Power
These are the times that try a constitutional conservative’s soul.
Donald Trump and his allies have proposed two legal maneuvers that could have profound consequences for the function of the federal government. He has proposed confirming presidential appointments through an abuse of his power to make recess appointments, and his allies have proposed reviving a mostly banned practice called impoundment, under which the president can refuse to spend money appropriated by Congress.
These proposals together would gut core constitutional functions of Congress and could make Trump our nation’s most imperial peacetime president.
\\\
An ascendant conservative political issue in recent years has familiar psychological roots, as this writer claims Democrats do not understand.
NY Times, M. Gessen, 22 Nov 2024: What Democrats Are Getting Wrong About Transgender Rights
In the last couple of years, as the right wing in the United States has stepped up its attacks on trans people, it has devoted tremendous energy to curbing access to gender-affirming care for minors (and in some cases adults). Supporters of such legislation argue that young people are not qualified to make — or even participate in — decisions they may regret later in life.
Of course, young people make all kinds of decisions they may later regret. …
But conservatives aren’t really concerned about people’s personal choices, or regrets. They’re more concerned about the tribe, in this case not humanity, but Christian America. The writer reviews what’s happened in Russia regarding everything non-heterosexual and non-reproductive. And then circles back, concluding,
Trump’s and Vance’s politics are coherent, and their legislative agenda is clear: Roll back trans rights, lesbian and gay rights, reproductive rights and women’s rights, all in the name of making America great, straight and white again.
I’ve written about this matter a couple three times here over the years, about how at base it’s existential panic about gay or trans people *not reproducing* and thus not providing their parents with grandchildren, not to mention expanding the tribe, i.e. their particular culture, or even the human race. (Never mind that reproductive technologies like IVF have provided many non-heterosexuals the ability to have children. Some though not all Republicans deeply object to these procedures as being “unnatural.”)
I last summarized my thoughts about this in this 2020 post, at the bottom, recalling comments I’d made in 2014.
