Thread by @shadihamid

In this new @WisdomCrowdsPod episode, @dmarusic & I discuss why we're ambivalent on impeachment. If I was an elected Democrat, I'd support proceeding with proceedings. Parties, after all, should be responsive to their constituents and to their base

1/x

soundcloud.com/the-wisdom-of-…

But I'm not an elected Democrat. And as someone who believes in ideology (in the non-pejorative sense) over party, I worry that the long-term costs of an impeachment effort that can't but fail in meeting its ostensible objective may be, well, costly

2/x

Another thing I struggle with is the fact that if impeachment is a constitutional option and if it isn't exercised now, then when would it ever be? (I doubt a president will ever shoot someone on 5th avenue). This is the "what the heck, just do it" argument

3/x

In my ideal world, impeachment, because it can't be what it was originally meant to be (a reflection of trans-partisan agreement), would basically never be exercised. But then we're stuck. There has to be *some* constitutional mechanism to removing uniquely bad presidents

4/x

This is one reason why parliamentary systems are preferable to presidential ones (all other things being equal, which they're of course not) in hyper-polarized contexts. There are regular, multiple, and not particularly controversial means of removing elected leaders

5/x

That said, in part because all other things are *not* equal, parliamentary systems aren't doing so great either, as @dmarusic rightly points out in our conversation

6/x

soundcloud.com/the-wisdom-of-…