I am not arguing in favor of authoritarianism or against democracy, to be clear. Just saying there is an inherent risk that if you give the common people power, the common people might do something dumb with it. I’m not aware of a system that removes that risk without other considerable downsides. There are other democratic governments that have fewer structural issues than the US, but none of them prevent the whole “sometimes, voters are very dumb” thing.
But Trump hasn’t proven unpopular; that’s why he won reelection. If the ruling party has a majority and the PM has their party’s support, nothing would happen in most other systems either.
Well the mechanism for preventing criminals who shit all over the constitution from getting reelected is supposed to be people not voting for him. There’s not really much a constitutional democracy can do about voters being fucking morons. Kind of an inherent flaw in the system.
Yeah, it’s rather obviously flawed in light of the current situation, but that is the mechanism that exists in the constitution.
It has impeachment. The list of reasons for impeachment are (quite possibly intentionally) vague. But it has to be done through Congress.
Investors are every bit as vulnerable to hype, marketing, and just plain poor understanding of tech as the general public is.
It doesn’t really matter what they call it. Companies that want to be waterfall (or more accurately, whose executives want waterfall style commitments) are going to be waterfall even if they call it Scrum.
In theory, if he went so far over the line that he became very unpopular, then Congress members would fear for their reelection chances if they didn’t publicly break with him. But with him attacking democracy itself, Congress may be more afraid of him than they are of voters. It’s a deeply troubling time.