Governors have much more power than members of Congress, but that goes both ways. Democratic leaders in Congress could be rhetorically and procedurally much more maximalist in their resistance to authoritarianism. It has fewer real consequences than governors doing the same. I don’t get it.
congressional Democrats often see Republicans as colleagues and voters as the enemy instead of the other way around
I think it is really easy to look around the house of reps, and think "we'll i dont need to stick my neck out, there's 200+ others that can."
Is there something about having to hang around each other so much that dilutes both ideology and the willingness to speak out/ruffle feathers?
Dems in Congress didn't run for office to oppose fascism. They never thought that would even be part of their job. They thought it was a comfy position to ride until they're 90 years old.
Turns out strong confederalism with no democratic reform inevitably leads to a weak state.
I think the act of running for office has become such a huge part of the story that there’s now a belief that it is the only part of the job that matters. The act of governing, and actually using any of the accrued political capital, is no longer part of their career plan once they are in office.
There's really nothing that Dems in Congress can *do* to resist. They can complain (protest), but without a majority they cannot actually make anything happen. And when Dems in Congress protest, we wouldn't necessarily see it. Governors have power over sovereign entities and can actually do things.
It would be a good start if they stopped voting to approve his cabinet nominees.
Are they still doing that?
Yes. www.senate.gov/legislative/...
Are those nominees bad? Are they worse than the people Trump would appoint as Acting? If the Dems withheld their votes, would it interfere with Trump’s designs?
To me, those questions are irrelevant. Is there any reason to approve his nominees and act like everything is business as usual? If withholding the votes is meaningless, then why not do it anyway? What message are they sending by voting in favor of his nominees?
By withholding votes for Jeannie Pirro but approving routine appointments, they’re sending the message that they’re not crazy partisans and that they want the government to function for the American people.
Which, for me, I’m fine with crazy partisanship by the Dems. But I have nothing in common with the average voter.
If refusing to rubber stamp Trump's nominees during ascendant fascism is considered "crazy partisanship," then we've already lost.
There's a personality difference between the person who says "I want to be part of a legislative body" and the person who says "I want to be in charge of a state"
Would be easier for Trump to consolidate federal power? Can hurt Trump with more ease when he crosses the line by ignoring power delegated to states? Maybe more focused on how things will be covered where governors pursue national coverage without care for how it will be?