I strongly recommend John Sides's post, and for that matter I also strongly recommend On Deaf Ears and the Strategic Presidency, the most essential readings about the presidency this side.
Elias Isquith is very agitated about one of the points in this post, which may be due to a lack of clarity on my part. To provide said clarity, I.
I find myself in an unusual position of arguing that someone is underestimating presidential power. Armando asserts that I argue that we shouldn't care who is president. So, working backward.
Given that making an argument on the merits that there is an "imperial presidency" on domestic as well as foreign policy is essentially impossible, as you can see from these.
Scott of course is right about the Green Lantern theory of domestic politics. There's just no way Obama is going to will Ben Nelson or Olympia Snowe into supporting a.
I have more to say about what the presidency and what it can and can't accomplish based on Jeff Shessol's terrific book on FDR and the court-packing fight. But.
It won't surprise most readers to know that my reactions to some of the responses to Corey Robin's informal roundtable are pretty similar to Matt's. The idea that there's not.
Ezra: Let’s agree that what matters isn’t how many jobs you “get caught trying” to create, but how many jobs you actually create. There’s virtually no evidence that if Obama.