I invite everyone to go read this article by Mark Paoletta, Daniel Shapiro and Brandon Stras.
“The History of Impoundments Before the Impoundment Control Act of 1974”
Linked at the end of this thread.
Let’s review key passages in this 🧵.
@elonmusk @DOGE @DataRepublican
“Until the Presidency of Richard Nixon, it was overwhelmingly understood that the power of the purse restricted only the President’s ability to spend more than an appropriation”
Meaning Presidents can’t spend unappropriated funds but aren’t required to spend ALL appropriations.
“And the President’s ability to spend less than an appropriation has been met with approbation, not censure, by congresses throughout the Nation’s history.”
This will be particularly important to the current Supreme Court that is clearly seeking to re-align with original intent.
1/ 🚨 “Nearly all Gallup measures that have shown some relationship to past presidential election outcomes or that speak to current perceptions of the two major parties favor the Republican Party over the Democratic Party.”
2/ “Chief among these are Republican advantages in U.S. adults’ party identification and leanings, the belief that the GOP rather than the Democratic Party is better able to handle the most important problem facing the country, Americans’ dissatisfaction with the state of the nation, and negative evaluations of the economy with a Democratic administration in office.”
3/ “More U.S. adults identify as Republican or say they lean toward the Republican Party (48%) than identify as or lean Democratic (45%). Those figures are based on an average of Gallup polls taken during the third quarter”
2/ These mini videos consumed over and over throughout the day, day after day alters the impact and value analysis of events particularly video based events like a debate.
In the past snap polls had more significance because it was likely the only time the majority of people would consume the debate video content.
3/ As a result, asking people their view of who “won” the debate immediately following the airing of the debate made some sense.
But now, the live airing of the debate actually makes up a small percentage of the saturation of the content into the public consciousness.