Hacker News Reader

Comment by jamiek88 | Hacker News Reader

US presidents answer to the people.

It’s completely different.

They answer to the people eventually, but while in office they wield powers unknown in our (British) system since the time of George III. And I mean that quite literally. The US president is essentially an elected British King circa 1789. They literally copied the constitutional role of the king point by point with a few minor alterations. The power to convene and dissolve parlia...er...congress, executive decrees are royal decrees, the veto on legislation, command of the armed forces, the power to pardon convicts, proroguation. Not exactly cutting edge constitutional innovation I'm afraid. We've moved on, but in some ways the US still stuck in the 18th Century.

You have an overly expansive view of presidential powers.

The Congress does not answer to the president. It is an independent institution. It does not convene and dissolve by presidential request.

Executive orders can be over-ruled by either of the other two branches of government

Veto power can be over-ruled by the congress.

Until recently, presidents needed congressional approval to make war. Now we skip that part and just don't call it a war.

>It does not convene and dissolve by presidential request.

And yet Article 2 Section 3 exists. Constitutional convention copy machine go Brrr. However I did exaggerate slightly for satirical effect. Maybe I should have just said "some alterations".

Yeah it's different, and worse IMHO. "The people" is an abstraction, like "God" or "Nature". The Queen is a real person that you have to go meet in her house, and bow to.

It’s completely different, that’s without a doubt. Whether or not a US President “answer[s] to the poeple” is debatable. W Bush taking the country to Iraq again, against a significant majority of the people comes to mind.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_opinion_in_the_United...

Support for the Iraq War at the time of invasion was either close to or a majority.

Throughout history, the people have tried to say "tut tut" to the president, and the response is usually large amounts of police violence.

Like all American politicians the POTUS does ultimately answer to the people, but only in an indirect fashion. Directly, the POTUS answers to the States because the States are the ones who elect him.

And isn't that going to be a shitshow in 2024?

In theory. But theory and practice are different things.

Does Joe Biden agree?

Does Donald Trump agree?

I would wager that neither man feels particularly accountable to the unwashed masses that both of them openly disdained.

Edit: Does George Bush agree?

Especially if they feel that they can use violence to overrule the will of the people.

Well, Trump didn't get re-elected and it doesn't seem like Biden will either. So they "answer" every 4 years.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com