[xhevahir]

It's good that smart people are involved if we take it at face value that they're trying increase "government efficiency," as opposed to, say, dismantling the welfare and regulatory state; if the latter are their aim, and if we don't want them to accomplish such a goal, we should not be cheered to learn that they're such clever lads.

[generalizations]

> dismantling the welfare and regulatory state

Pretty sure that's exactly what the US voted for in the last election, considering that was pretty explicitly promised. I think most of the US is cheering them on as they do it.

[seanmcdirmid]

That's what 49.8% of the voters voted for. So not really "most" for any reasonable meaning of the term "most".

[briandear]

People don’t elect presidents, states do, and states elected Trump with a 312 to 226 electoral vote margin — so the states overwhelmingly voted for Trump. The purpose of the United States federal government is very strictly spelled out — and the 10th amendment makes it very clear that powers not expressly mentioned in the Constitution are reserved for the states. The U.S. is a republic, not a democracy.

[seanmcdirmid]

Electoral votes don’t support a president’s agenda, people do. Being underwater already at the beginning of his term means the other politicians that have to work with him (who also have to get elected) are more under pressure not to. That’s why not having the support of most voters is relevant in Trump getting things done. Grand parent basically said this guy has a mandate from the American people and he really doesn’t. Heck, it was big news that his disapproval rating is almost the same as his approval rating now, the most popular he has ever been but still not liked by most Americans.

[SV_BubbleTime]

Trump‘s popularity is currently polling higher than it ever has. 53% according to CBS which has never once overestimated in Trump’s favor.

He is more popular now than any point in his first term.

[seanmcdirmid]

Yes which is still not very popular. The poll I’m looking at on 538 puts his disapproval and approval rating as almost finally meeting for once.

[tasty_freeze]

Trump won by a very small margin, 1.5%, and didn't even get 50% of the popular vote. It isn't a "landslide" or "mandate" no matter how many times they claim it. Yes, Trump won, but that isn't grounds for ignoring the constitution. There is a separation of powers and Trump can't delegate powers which aren't his to Musk to delegate to technoboys.

[klipt]

Unfortunately the only leverage Congress has to stop Executive overreach is impeachment.

If they refuse to impeach, then they are tacitly handing the Executive ever more power, essentially moving us from a republic to an elected dictatorship.

And given that the GOP has a majority, no matter how slim, it seems very unlikely they will impeach.

[HPsquared]

The executive branch systematically dismantling itself doesn't sound like "ever more power".

[saulpw]

It is if they are dismantling the pieces for their own benefit. Removing power from the institution and giving it to themselves.

[klipt]

If Congress already passed a law to regulate food so customers don't get poisoned.

And the president can say "I'm gonna ignore that and dismantle the agency Congress set up to do it"

What power does Congress have anymore?

[SV_BubbleTime]

Is that honestly what is happening though? Or is that an exaggeration and presumption to try and make your point?

Fact, no one can show that USAID’s more curious and controversial grants served American interests.

[briandear]

312 to 226 isn’t a “small margin.”

You don’t measure a baseball game by number of hits or strike outs, but by the number of runs scored. The popular vote is literally irrelevant.

[tzs]

The assertion was about what the population supports. For that question it is the popular vote that matters, not the electoral college vote.

[carefulfungi]

Why do MAGA conservatives cheer the over-turning of Chevron, dramatically limiting the executive branch's power to interpret law, while also simultaneously cheering Trump's initiative to seize Congress's power of the purse?

What's the internal logic that rationalizes executive regulatory power being unconstitutional with a legal presidential power to unilaterally ignore Congress's funding allocations?

[b112]

Most Americans, whether on the left or right, have no real idea how government works, what branch has what powers, and more importantly why.

They have no understanding of history, of how important such separation of power are.

In such context, it is easy to see the logic. They have no idea the relevance, only that their team likes the outcome.