Presidency midterm Flashcards
Green Lantern Theory
Brendan Nyhan’s idea that “the president can achieve any political or policy objective if only he tries hard enough or uses the right tactics/strategies.” The president is functionally all-powerful, but if he faces challenges in action, it’s because he’s not being smart enough. Divided into the Reagan version and the LBJ version: Reagan is dictated by communication capabilities in bargaining with the public, while LBJ bargains to Congress to vote through his agenda. (context argument by Skowronek; Reagan = tv personality, LBJ = HOR seat; Kernell and individualized pluralism) Critique is that it forgets the limits of power outlined in Federalist 69, and Article II of the Constitution including checks and balances and separation of powers. They also forget the idea that in the LBJ presidency, he had contextual leads in Congress following JFK’s assassination.
Note: partisan gaps between presidents and their opposing parties have increased over time; aka polarization
Hamilton + Anti-Federalists
Federalists wanted to clear the air about Anti-Federalist sentiments, as they feared the president/executive branch would be too much like tyrannical King George III (Creation of AofC). Even so, the Federalists outlined the full limits of the executive’s power including 4-year terms, impeachment, possibility of being tried for treason. Power to veto/return bills but must pass 2/3 of each legislative body in Congress, Commander in Chief. Nominates members of supreme court, and can make treaties if it gets 2/3 Senate approval.
Trump/Biden Inaugurations
Trump used more words like “protected, dreams, countries, wealth” while Biden used more “democracy, story, days, truth, soul” words
Separation of Powers
Congress – popular will, rights, preservation – deliberation – plurality, proximity, bicameralism, competent powers
President – preservation, rights, popular will – energy and “stead administration of laws” – unity, 4 years and reelection, competent powers
Courts – rights – “judgment, not will” – small collegial body, life tenure, power linked to the argument
Display on Presidential Ranking
Higher-ranked presidents are generally democratic; the higher-ranked executives some at the start of a party system/regime, the bad are at the end (can be linked to Showronek’s regime chart)
Unitary Executive Theory
A result of executive opposers who were concerned that executive power was too broad, (essentially enumerated v. implied powers) ex. Trump using executive order and “perpetuating Jan. 6)
Bill Barr
Former Attorney General (2019-2020), speaks on unitary executive theory and his critique from democrats, he argues that the unitary executive theory isn’t a theory, but explicitly outlined in Article II. Barr worries the authority/limitation of the president following Watergate and the abuse of power, has been in a chokehold of sorts
Skowronek’s Conservative Insurgency and Presidential Power
Evolution of unitary executive theory leads to institutions “mirroring” conservative views because they want a stronger executive (dems as institutional/congressional, repubs as singular, centralized)
Populism
Concept of appealing to the general public and how the government thus far has been ineffective; Trump used this in wanting to resurrect Reagan’s regime
Howell/Moe’s Why the President Needs More Power
Obviously most likely agrees with UET, describes how Congress by nature is parochial (limited in membership) and focuses more on special interest issues, so it’s ineffective in solving national problems; when populism fails, support increases, and a dyadic government creates factions where the president is better at reflecting national interest than legislative branches (presidents have incentives to do so in order to build positive legacy); they provide reforms where president should be able to introduce bills and pace agenda (essentially it’s easier to hold one person accountable. This populism results in negative polarization, or disliking the other side more than you approve of your party candidate
Pika/Timeline of Candidate Nomination (negative partisanship)/ Yglesias’ US Presidential Primary Process
Note: this is ultimately a timeline of the shift from an elite-driven process to an open system, where parties have their unique agendas
1789-1824: congressional caucuses and factions endured through the nomination process #partydivison Jacksonian Revolution 1825-1912: national party conventions ran presidential selection and delegates from all states came/were nominated by party bosses who voted in saloons and bought votes, a very transactional system #corruption 1913-1968: primaries began alongside conventions and delegates weren’t bribed; Kennedy joined the primary in WV # religion and became electable when family bought votes, he rolled those votes into his national campaign 1968 – Democratic Convention Police riot alongside Vietnam war activism; Lyndon Johnson was president, NH votes first, and anti-war campaign incites Kennedy to win, citizens then blamed Nixon's election of the Convention Riot, resulting in the democratic desire for McGovern/Fraser Commission for reform 1969 – primaries and caucuses were adopted by both parties as a result of state campaigning power 1972 – McGovern runs after passing democratic reform 1976 – Governor for Georgia Jimmy Carter uses the new reforms to campaign in Iowa and runs for democrats after Watergate, then goes to NH and wins 1980 – Reagan election on the back of his TV personality abilities; democrats wanted to reform again to keep another Carter from happening; superdelegates reverse McGovern and make the system more elite, voting percent required for delegates to participate; superdelegates end in 2017 and republicans increase threshold for candidacy 2020 – Republican delegate Allocation Rules lean toward winner-take-all because it enables populism
McGovern/Fraser Commission
Reform efforts on the democratic side following the Convention Riot, which required delegates to vote at public conventions/caucuses for proportional representation.
Invisible Primary
Endorsement scheme to rally donor support before the actual primaries, there used to be campaign funding procedures, but there aren’t now; Obama 2008 example of different funding campaigns, he raised money without federal funding and built grassroots movement; by contrast, Trump utilized grassroots but also used free media coverage due to his controversy; accountability for spending decreases as spending increases
Discoveries, Scrutiny, and Decline
Sides argument that electoral connections as a candidate is considered in the electoral college, and the media scrutinizes them so they lose support and other candidates rise, and the cycle repeats #individualized pluralism; there’s a beat structure to media coverage, a surplus of tension increases, peaks, then scrutiny declines support
Sides’ Change and More of the Same
Describes how candidate interactions affect party identity at the macro level: DNC as an infomercial and RNC as a Trump-show; Bernie Sanders hurt Hilary Clinton’s campaign during 2016 and it broke down the democratic party, all other candidates backed down, electability was then in the hands of democrats, and in 2020 there were so many candidates as a result of factional interests that a coalition gave everyone a seat; Chapter 4 describe the endorsements of candidates over time
Trump v. Biden Indictment
Jan. 6 indictment; there’s credibility to try Trump extensively #whatisthecaponthe1stAmendment
Polarization reform means symbolic racism perpetuates bipartisanship; thermometer scales of feeling by party: perceived divergence is greater than actual divergence
