Are Congress, the U.S. Constitution, and State Law Going to Shackle Trump?

[Debater Slayer]

Now that Trump has been elected in an event that is beyond unfortunate, to say the least, everyone everywhere will have to live with the fact that he's now President of the U.S.

Given that, do you think the Congress, the U.S. Constitution, and state law in general are going to shackle him enough not to allow him to execute his most salient plans, like building a wall between the U.S. and Mexico and banning the entry of Muslims into the U.S.?

 

[idav]

I've always liked when they have a one sided president congress cause they actually get work done.

Wait is the senate/congress still up for grabs?

 

[Debater Slayer]

I've always liked when they have a one sided president congress cause they actually get work done.

Wait is the senate/congress still up for grabs?

As embarrassing as this is to admit, I have no idea, actually.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

The Republican Senate won't lift a finger to stop him. This was probably their plan for the last few months: illegally obstruct Obama from nominating another Supreme Court to replace Scalia and bank on Trump winning so they can add another evangelical nutter to the SCOTUS and permanently shaft women & LGBTs.

 

[Laika]

Now that Trump has been elected in an event that is beyond unfortunate, to say the least, everyone everywhere will have to live with the fact that he's now President of the U.S.

Given that, do you think the Congress, the U.S. Constitution, and state law in general are going to shackle him enough not to allow him to execute his most salient plans, like building a wall between the U.S. and Mexico and banning the entry of Muslims into the U.S.?

Sadly, the constitution is a piece of paper and it is only worth what people are willing to sacrifice for it. My impression is that the Democrats didn't stand up against Bush's policies that much. I don't expect Republicans to stand up to Trump as it may threaten their chances of re-election with pro-trump republican voters.

Ultimately- there has to be unity from the outset that Republicans AND Democrats resist Trump's more unconstitutional policies or resist the appointment of judges that threaten the constitution so that the seperation of powers is an effective check on a Trump presidency. If this was going to happen- it should have happened already so I think this is unlikely.

What Congress does or doesn't do is not a reason for the American people to swallow it though. They can be active and should resist whereever possible.

 

[Daemon Sophic]

Sadly, the constitution is a piece of paper and it is only worth what people are willing to sacrifice for it. My impression is that the Democrats didn't stand up against Bush's policies that much. I don't expect Republicans to stand up to Trump as it may threaten their chances of re-election with pro-trump republican voters.

Ultimately- there has to be unity from the outset that Republicans AND Democrats resist Trump's more unconstitutional policies or resist the appointment of judges that threaten the constitution so that the seperation of powers is an effective check on a Trump presidency. If this was going to happen- it should have happened already so I think this is unlikely.

What Congress does or doesn't do is not a reason for the American people to swallow it though. They can be active and should resist whereever possible.

I voted your post as the winner.
I don't like the facts you present, along with their implications.....but they are facts none-the-less.

Elizabeth Warren in 2020!!

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Republicans will now control every thing, the presidency, both houses, and the judiciary and most state governors.
It will not be in their self interest to oppose Trump. He will have a free hand for the entire first term at least.

Greed and self interest will be the signature.

 

[Laika]

I voted your post as the winner.
I don't like the facts you present, along with their implications.....but they are facts none-the-less.

Elizabeth Warren in 2020!!

Thanks.

 

[Kuzcotopia]

Now that Trump has been elected in an event that is beyond unfortunate, to say the least, everyone everywhere will have to live with the fact that he's now President of the U.S.

Given that, do you think the Congress, the U.S. Constitution, and state law in general are going to shackle him enough not to allow him to execute his most salient plans, like building a wall between the U.S. and Mexico and banning the entry of Muslims into the U.S.?

Well, he's not a fiscal conservative, an evangelical, or a neocon. . . he's even against free trade which, up until this election, was a Republican staple. There's plenty to disagree with on his right, so I doubt he'll get a free pass. The worst issue here is the potential for even more tax cuts and deregulation. These tactics led us off an economic cliff between 2001-2008, and we still haven't recovered.

No matter what happens, I do hope that his supporters hold his feet to the fire on his promise of adding high quality manufacturing jobs. That was what many in the rural parts of this country voted for, and if he doesn't somehow conjure up a way to make this happen, then I don't see how anyone can still vote for him again. . . but then again, so much of this is smoke and mirrors.

He's a wildcard, and he go could rogue in a variety of ways the GOP would find hard to swallow. None of us have any idea what will happen next.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Now that Trump has been elected in an event that is beyond unfortunate, to say the least, everyone everywhere will have to live with the fact that he's now President of the U.S.

Given that, do you think the Congress, the U.S. Constitution, and state law in general are going to shackle him enough not to allow him to execute his most salient plans, like building a wall between the U.S. and Mexico and banning the entry of Muslims into the U.S.?

The election is over now. I think we should expect a huge rejection of migration from Mexico, a change in tariff structure, a change in taxes, changes in education policy, Science policy, internet policies, military spending and things like the governments attitude towards separation of church and state. This decision to select Trump reveals a huge disappointment with the progressive agenda. It means that the liberals and progressives have been living too far in a liberal future and rejecting the present too strongly. The country was not able to keep up with their ideals.

 

[Kartari]

Hi DS,

Now that Trump has been elected in an event that is beyond unfortunate, to say the least, everyone everywhere will have to live with the fact that he's now President of the U.S.

Given that, do you think the Congress, the U.S. Constitution, and state law in general are going to shackle him enough not to allow him to execute his most salient plans, like building a wall between the U.S. and Mexico and banning the entry of Muslims into the U.S.?

Good question. Considering the fact that the 13th and 14th amendments to the constitution, as a for instance, did nothing to stop segregation and other racist policies from being implemented and enforced in the United States for a century after those amendments were adopted, @Laika is unfortunately correct in stating that it's "a piece of paper." People have a funny (well, not so funny really) way of reinterpreting even US law to suit their own agenda, and this was the case for the courts and these amendments.

Looks like the Senate and the House are both Republican majority as well. Whether he gets away with his unconstitutional policies or not ultimately depends on how large and lasting a cleft Trump left between his party and himself. I expect tension at first, but in the world of politics, anything goes. I would not be surprised if those Republicans who had denounced him as a candidate sooner or later start pretending they're best buds again.

Ultimately, we the people need to be utterly vigilant and speak out when civil rights are being trampled, or when unfounded wars are declared (i.e. only because a few Iranian sailors flipped the bird and our feeble-minded president's feelings were hurt), etc.. If and when Trump starts trying to infringe on the fundamental rights of Muslim Americans, against gay marriage, etc., we need to raise awareness in the public of what precisely he is doing, write and call our congressmen and senators, and so forth.

 

[Revoltingest]

Now that Trump has been elected in an event that is beyond unfortunate, to say the least, everyone everywhere will have to live with the fact that he's now President of the U.S.

Given that, do you think the Congress, the U.S. Constitution, and state law in general are going to shackle him enough not to allow him to execute his most salient plans, like building a wall between the U.S. and Mexico and banning the entry of Muslims into the U.S.?

Trump's win is not so much a mandate for his various agendas,
as it was a mandate that Hillary be rejected. Trump will find that
a party not very friendly to him has a majority in Congress. And
the other party will be outright hostile. This is good because it
will place some useful limits on his....uh....excesses.

 

[Lighthouse]

Now that Trump has been elected in an event that is beyond unfortunate, to say the least, everyone everywhere will have to live with the fact that he's now President of the U.S.

Given that, do you think the Congress, the U.S. Constitution, and state law in general are going to shackle him enough not to allow him to execute his most salient plans, like building a wall between the U.S. and Mexico and banning the entry of Muslims into the U.S.?

The wall was doubtful from the start in my opinion. Banning the entry of Muslims was also doubtful from the start. People say things to get elected or people are opportunistic about things they know will likely not place. Just like I doubt he will pursue Hillary being locked up. Election hype, people being hysterical and fearful over nothing in my opinion.
And even if it wasn't just election hype, people should have known better that Congress, soverign states wouldn't allow half of the stuff presented.

 

[Lighthouse]

The Republican Senate won't lift a finger to stop him. This was probably their plan for the last few months: illegally obstruct Obama from nominating another Supreme Court to replace Scalia and bank on Trump winning so they can add another evangelical nutter to the SCOTUS and permanently shaft women & LGBTs.

Soverign states and people will not allow LGBT's to be shafted. Their rights will remain, even if marriage became defined.

 

[Revoltingest]

Soverign states and people will not allow LGBT's to be shafted. Their rights will remain, even if marriage became defined.

I imagine that a many lefties are now thinking.....
"States rights....maybe not so bad after all !"

 

[Lighthouse]

I imagine that a many lefties are now thinking.....
"States rights....maybe not so bad after all !"

Indeed, and so critical to get those rights invoked into all soverign states. Now there is no turning back.
In my opinion, that was a historic success on the Obama administration and its most successful feat. 8 years of office and if that is all that was accomplished..... HUGE success.
Even if marriage comes defined down the road, I don't see any possible way LGBT equal rights are removed despite all of the fears and fear tactics presented. In my opinion, people learning that the battle wasn't about the equal abstract definition of marriage, it was about equal rights. Equal rights won. Breathe, folks