voice for democracy

America caught the presidential democracy disease – Yahoo News

On election night in 2012, Republican nominee Mitt Romney conceded defeat around 1 a.m. After calling then-President Barack Obama to offer his congratulations on re-election, Romney gave a speech to his supporters. "I pray that the president will be successful," he said.
That's probably the last time a Republican will ever concede defeat in a presidential race — and the fate of the our democracy may depend on proving my expectation false.
Former President Donald Trump said there was rampant fraud in an election he won in 2016, and he tried for months to overturn his defeat in 2020, pushing the "big lie" that President Biden stole the election. That has cemented a new norm among the Republican base that their electoral defeats are never legitimate. A recent NBC News poll found that while 84 percent of Republicans thought their vote would be fairly counted in October 2020, a year later just 41 percent expect the same in future elections. As David Corn writes at Mother Jones, conservatives including former Trump adviser Steve Bannon are pre-emptively casting doubt on this week's elections in Virginia, and a Marist poll published Monday found just 33 percent of Republicans will trust the results of the 2024 elections if their candidate loses. Unless this trajectory changes, our political competition will erupt into open violence.
It's hard to see what could change it, but let's begin by noting this state of affairs isn't solely Trump's fault. American-style presidential democracy incentivizes the very deranged behavior we're seeing from him and the rest of the GOP.
A presidential democracy, of course, is one in which the head of government is elected separately from the legislature (our current system) — as compared to a parliamentary democracy, where the legislature elects the head of government (as in New Zealand or Denmark). Political scientist Juan Linz argued in a famous essay, "The Perils of Presidentialism," that presidential systems have three major weakness as compared to parliamentary ones, weaknesses he said explain why every presidential democracy in global history has eventually collapsed or fallen to a coup d'etat. (The United States is the one exception — so far.)
The first weakness is the inherent possibility of conflict between the president and the legislature. Both are able to claim democratic legitimacy, because both might have won elections in which they received a majority of the vote. "There is no democratic principle on the basis of which [this conflict] can be resolved, and the mechanisms the constitution might provide are likely to prove too complicated and aridly legalistic to be of much force in the eyes of the electorate," writes Linz. The American practice of midterm elections, which always have very different electorates than presidential votes, greatly increase the chance of such conflict.
Parliamentary systems have single elections and the same government, usually a coalition, in both the legislative and administrative branch. Majorities are almost always composed of two or more parties, which tends to defuse extremism and megalomania. Even small parties can easily become part of a government and gain meaningful policy concessions commensurate with their public support.
Second is rigidity. American presidents serve for fixed four-year terms, and, aside from impeachment, there's no way to oust them early. "It breaks the political process into discontinuous, rigidly demarcated periods, leaving no room for the continuous readjustments that events may demand," Linz argues. In a parliamentary democracy, by contrast, the prime minister can call new elections or be removed through a vote of no confidence, which is also followed by a new election. This is a straightforward way to dissolve political deadlock or cast aside a corrupt or incompetent head of government (or party leader) without too much fuss and with guaranteed democratic legitimacy.
The third weakness is how presidents stoke polarization. The head of government in our system is a powerful, winner-take-all office that, as noted, serves for a fixed term. Presidential elections are hence high-stakes and zero-sum, "with all the potential for conflict such games portend," Linz writes.
Combining head of government with head of state in a single position also influences the character of the office. The president is seen as a sort of national mascot, the sole personal representative of the whole country — which only heightens conflict with the legislature. "In his frustration," Linz notes, "he may be tempted to define his policies as reflections of the popular will and those of his opponents as the selfish designs of narrow interests."
Parliamentary systems split these roles. (In the United Kingdom, for example, the prime minister is the head of government and the monarch the head of state.) A prime minister doesn't claim to be the personal, embodied will of the whole population, only the leader of a necessarily temporary coalition that could end at any moment.
These weaknesses create a powerful temptation for presidents and parties to resort to cheating or violence to gain or retain such great power. In worst-case scenarios, the resulting conflict or power vacuum may end with the military picking a winner or simply seizing power itself. This outcome has been commonplace in Latin American history where countries (alas) have tended to follow the U.S. presidential model instead of Europe's parliamentary approach.
As writer John Ganz points out, much of Linz's work on this topic was dedicated to explaining why the United States seemed largely immune to these problems. Linz argued that a tradition of bipartisan compromise; diffuse and politically overlapping parties that served more as patronage machines than disciplined, ideological blocs; and a large majority of moderate voters tended to defuse the conflicts inherent in a presidential system.
All those immunities are lost today, and America has every one of the morbid symptoms of a presidential system in crisis. The Obama administration saw unprecedented conflict between the president and Congress, with House Republicans threatening default on the national debt and Senate Republicans denying Obama an appointment to the Supreme Court, another first. Trump was the first president ever to be impeached twice. Biden now enjoys a Democratic Congress, but if Republicans win the midterm elections, even more bitter conflict is absolutely guaranteed (witness Rep. Lauren Boebert [R-Colo.] and Matt Gaetz [R-Fl.] "joking" about blowing up the metal detectors in Congress recently).
The rigidity of the presidency has also proved to be a wretched hindrance of late. Last year, we had possibly the biggest numskull in the entire country overseeing the public health bureaucracy during the worst pandemic in a century — and no way to get rid of him. Trump proved impeachment of a deeply corrupt or even openly seditious president is rendered meaningless by modern partisan discipline. Our one means of removing bad presidents is a dead letter.
Finally, the extreme power and prestige of the presidency — ironically produced by the very separation of powers scheme that was supposed to restrain concentrations of power — has motivated ever more extreme politics. The president is not just "the head of state and government," to quote a pseudonymous writer, but also increasingly seen as "the embodiment of the polity itself."
This holds especially true on the right. Trump as president catalyzed a cult of personality in which his cruelty was celebrated by tens of millions of hooting MAGA voters who gloried in indulging their most irresponsible impulses without consequence, just like he did. And for Trump personally, the tremendous wealth and influence afforded to presidents undoubtedly helped motivate his attempt at a classic autogolpe after losing the election.
At The New York Times, Jamelle Bouie reminds us that the first attempt at an American constitution, the Articles of Confederation, failed spectacularly. Then, the framers of the current Constitution pulled a fast one on the states — without any legal authorization — to launch an entirely new system of governance. They got away with it because the failures of the status quo were so manifest and the ideological stakes so low that state governments grudgingly went along with the plan.
I see no reason to expect that history to repeat, even if the accelerating incapacity of the U.S. government reaches an Articles level of dysfunction. In 1789, the United States was a tiny, poor, provincial backwater, of little interest to great powers of the day. Now it is the world's most powerful country, with by far the largest military, the most control over global financial pipelines, and an economy rivaled only by China's in scale. At bottom, political contests are about control over status and resources, and stakes don't come higher than domination over the rotting American colossus.
The GOP could still steer us off this grim course. But it beggars belief to imagine Trump (or any of the mini-Trump creeps rising through the Republican ranks) turning down the rhetorical temperature or abandoning convenient delusions about Democrats stealing elections. And absent that or some similarly implausible fix, we come back to my expectation: that once elections are sufficiently discredited that open theft attempts are expected, the old-fashioned method of resolving political disputes — violence — will return.
5 riotously funny cartoons about Steve Bannon's contempt of Congress charge
5 scarily funny cartoons about the evils of Facebook
Aaron Neville ribs Kyrsten Sinema's denim-vest-at-work look
The discussion over whether Republicans can win without Trump overlooks a more important question: Why hasn't the ex-president faced justice yet?
Trump was enraged and hung up on Parscale when he learned of the low turnout at the rally, journalist Jonathan Karl writes in his upcoming book.
Fox NewsFox News anchor Harris Faulkner had her conspiratorial bubble surprisingly burst on Thursday by Ari Fleischer of all people, who unequivocally told her that President Joe Biden does actually control the White House.After spending an inordinate amount of her Thursday morning interview with the former Bush flack discussing the right-wing outrage du jour—that Vice President Kamala Harris supposedly used a French accent—Faulkner, who has long been touted by Fox News as one of its “straight n
The accused set up a pro-Trump PAC called "Liberty Action Group" and a pro-Clinton PAC called "Progressive Priorities" in 2016.
Trump's supporters stormed the US Capitol on January 6, challenging the 2020 election results and chanting that VP Mike Pence should be hanged.
Madison Cawthorn has said he plans not to run in his home Western North Carolina district, instead seeking reelection in a district to the east.
"I'm sorry. I threw everything I could at it," Parscale told Trump of the rally before being hung up on, ABC's Jon Karl writes in his upcoming book.
A former central bank governor won a key election in southeast Nigeria, results showed on Wednesday, beating President Muhammadu Buhari's ruling APC party candidate in a ballot seen as a test ahead of the 2023 presidential race.
Of more than 12,000 ballots cast in Orlando’s city council elections last week, one vote caught the attention of the Supervisor of Elections office when it was rejected by a vote-counting machine. Upon further review, it mostly looked like any other ballot. It was marked with a number identifying it as being from the Rock Lake Community Center precinct. It was laid out identically to official …
Photo Illustration by Elizabeth Brockway/The Daily Beast/GettyWhen Chris Christie withdrew from consideration to be Donald Trump’s White House chief of staff in 2018, multiple outlets reported it was for family considerations and that the ex-governor was not officially offered the gig.But that may not be the full story. In his new book, Republican Rescue, due out next week from Threshold Editions and obtained by The Daily Beast, Christie claims that he was, indeed, offered the powerful position—
The popular daughter of Philippine leader Rodrigo Duterte on Thursday joined a new political party and could run for a national position, its top official said, just days out from a deadline to firm up candidates for 2022 presidential elections. Sara Duterte-Carpio, 43, has led opinion polls throughout this year as the most preferred candidate for the presidency, a post she has repeatedly said she had no interest in pursuing. Duterte-Carpio is a promising leader and a tremendous asset, said congressman Martin Romualdez, president of Lakas-CMD, the party controlled by former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo that she joined.
Trump won't run 'because if he hates anything in the world, he hates being called a loser,' former national security advisor John Bolton said.
A senior campaign official said the hospitalized staffer "was actually worried he was going to die," ABC News' Jonathan Karl reports.
The former president claimed he was sending his "envoy ambassador" to the Kosovo-Serbia border. The White House said he doesn't have one.
The Republican Senate frontrunner was targeted earlier in an ad criticizing him for courting evangelical Christians.
Thirty-five years ago, Burkina Faso's radical leader Thomas Sankara sent 600 youngsters, most of them orphans, to train in Cuba — a scheme, he declared, that would steer the country to a new dawn.
A three-judge appeals panel temporarily blocked House committee access to Donald Trump's records while the case is argued in the Capitol riot probe.
Virginia's governor-elect spoke out on the controversy and said he was frustrated it was putting so much attention on his teenage son
A post on Facebook shared more than a hundred times claims to show Oromo Liberation Army forces in the back of a military truck heading for Ethiopia’s capital city Addis Ababa as a year-long conflict in the country rages on. However, the claim is false; the image in the post was digitally altered and actually shows government soldiers heading to Abi Adi, in northern Ethiopia, in May 2021.The Facebook post was published on November 2, 2021, and includes an image of armed soldiers in the back of a
NEW YORK — Leaders of the city’s Black Lives Matter movement on Wednesday threatened “riots” and “bloodshed” in the streets if Mayor-elect Eric Adams reverses the abolition of the NYPD’s controversial anti-crime units. “If he thinks that they’re going to go back to the old ways of policing, then we are going to take to the streets again. There will be riots, there will be fire and there will …

source