I used to think like that. Now in my country we have a president who would use that to deport or target political opponents, track people who criticize Israel, etc.
You can never put the genie back in the bottle and you never know who will be in charge in 20 years
I don’t get it, so you’re saying that the US isn’t a full democracy and the leader has too much power, but you think the US should implement digital ID anyway ignoring that situation? As if that will help?
The president isn't supposed to have that much power in the US either. The federal government in general wasn't supposed to have much power; power is supposed to be reserved to the states except for specific scenarios enumerated in our constitution. Unfortunately, a century of blatantly illegal power grabs by the federal government, combined with Congress (which should've acted as a check upon the president) willingly giving their power over to the president, we are in a pretty bad spot. However, if it happened to us it could happen to any country. At the end of the day the constitution of a nation is only meaningful to the extent that people will actually enforce it.
The President doesn't have that much power in the US. Head of the executive, yes, but that's it.
And what has he done? Enforced immigration laws according to written law? Reorganized the executive branch?
He can't pass any laws by himself. The judiciary can overturn his executive orders.
How about stacked the supreme court with sycophants (at least one of which has been caught taking bribes) whereby allowing his gross violations of the law to be tolerated on appeal to the supreme court (legal eagle has a great video on this).
And then bullied executive who dare disagree with him (e.g. jan 6 commission, and his first impeachment) and even perform completely baseless criminal investigations that (e.g. against Comey) that are so ill-advised that he has to appoint unqualified prosecutors to even file these claims because no serious one would stand for it.
He now wields enough scary-factor that even though we have handwritten proof of his involvement with Eepstein that his own party is too cowardly to impeach him or even release the files (the same party that freaked out about Clinton getting a blowjob now afraid to go after a pedophile, and one who flirts with the idea of pardoning Maxwell and moved her to a minimum security facility)
> He now wields enough scary-factor that even though we have handwritten proof of his involvement with Eepstein that his own party is too cowardly to impeach him or even release the files
I think they're only cowardly because each elected individual's goal is to survive long enough to get a sweet exit deal. Voting to impeach Trump is the correct thing to do (blatant corruption, violation of due processes, etc.), but it will surely lessen their chances of reelection.
I think Congress is full of a bunch of individuals trying to maximize personal gain agnostic of the outcome for the country, but I'm not sure how to realign the incentives to fix that.
Yeah but the US was never a full democracy. Part of the problem with the US is that the president has way too much power to begin with.
If trump was elected prime minister of Sweden, he wouldn't have been able to do half the stuff he's done.