Hacker News Reader

Comment by nostrademons | Hacker News Reader

I was just thinking that from 1988 to 2008 (20 years), a Bush or Clinton was president the entire time. From 1980 to 2013, a Bush or Clinton was either President, Vice President, or Secretary of State the entire time. If Hillary or Jeb Bush wins in 2016 and serves two terms, then from 1980 to 2024, the only years that a Bush or Clinton will not have been in one of the three executive offices of the United States is 2013-2016. Let that sink in: for 40 out 44 years, members of the same two families will have occupied the top 3 offices in government, and for 28 years, they will have been President.

Man. I thought we got rid of hereditary monarchies in 1776, but that's a helluva lot longer than most kings served.

View on HN

There was an Adams or a Jefferson serving as either President or Vice President of the country, as well, for the first twenty years of our nationhood. And then after an eight year break, the son of the first President Adams became Secretary of State. And then President himself. An Adams or Jefferson was President, VP, or Secretary of State for the first 36 out of 44 years the US existed!

I'm not sure what the above proves. Neither then nor now is what's going on anything like a hereditary monarchy. For one thing, Hillary Clinton is not the heir of Bill Clinton. And in both cases other people have been in the mix holding power. Washington during Adam's Vice Presidency. Obama during Hillary Clinton's Secretaryship of State. Which kind of kills the "mono" part of a "monarchy" -- if there are a bunch of different people from a bunch of different families running around with power. (Is "polyarchy" a word?)

So don't get too freaked.

(Also, plenty of first world democracies have hereditary monarchs. The United Kingdom, Sweden, the Netherlands, Spain, Australia, Canada, Japan, etc. The existence of a hereditary monarchy isn't necessarily anti-democratic.)

> Is "polyarchy" a word?

Oligarchy, per the OP.

No, polyarchy is something different. The word does seem to exist:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyarchy

This is nothing new. John Adams was the 2nd President and his son was the 6th President. William Harrison was the 9th president and his grandson Benjamin Harrison was the 23rd president. Theodore Roosevelt and Franklin Roosevelt were distance cousins. Just reading that Franklin's wife was closer in relation to Theodore than Franklin. Include John, Robert, and Ted Kennedy. Surely there would have been a greater dynasty if John wasn't assassinated.

While your point is entirely valid, it's worth remembering that while the various Bushes are related genetically, Hillary Rodham is related to Bill Clinton only by marriage, therefore it's not a hereditary link.

And Chelsea isn't related to Bill at all.. ;)

Webster Hubbell is apparently her real father, apparently it's a fairly open secret.

I didn't realize Chelsea had been elected to high office. I should read the news more often.

Point being, there aren't any genetic "Clintons" to pass the torch down to.

Secretary of State isn't one of the top three offices in the Federal Government.

Speaker of the House and President pro tempore of the Senate are both higher, and plainly more important.

It can also easily be argued that the Chief Justice and Fed Chair (granted the Fed occupies an unusual quasi-government role, it's fully within the control of the US Government) positions are far more important, influential, and powerful as far as the Federal Government is concerned, compared to the Secretary of State.

> Secretary of State isn't one of the top three offices in the Federal Government.

> Speaker of the House and President pro tempore of the Senate are both higher, and plainly more important.

There's an easy measure by which Secretary of State is third; they succeed after the vice president. Why are the two you listed "plainly" more important than Secretary of State?

Although it's been switched around a few times, since 1947 the order has been Vice President, Speaker of the House, President pro tempore of the Senate, then Secretary of State and the rest of the cabinet.

Except they don't. Under the Presidential Succession Act of 1947, both the Speaker and President pro tem come before the Secretary of State.[0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_lin...

The succession is: President

Vice President (also nominally the leader of the Senate)

Speaker of the House

President pro tempore of the Senate

Cabinet by seniority of the cabinet position, starting w State

> one of the three executive offices

There are not "three" executive offices of the US and the secretary of state certainly isn't one of the three. It's the highest rank cabinet position, but definitely not in the same category as president/vice president.

Kings often have shortish reigns, but you're comparing the performance of multiple families to the reign of an individual king. 50 years is nothing compared to the time a set of multiple royal families can hold a throne.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com