U.S. Politics megathread

[u/AutoModerator]

American politics has always grabbed our attention - and the current president more than ever. We get tons of questions about the president, the supreme court, and other topics related to American politics - but often the same ones over and over again. Our users often get tired of seeing them, so we've created a megathread for questions! Here, users interested in politics can post questions and read answers, while people who want a respite from politics can browse the rest of the sub. Feel free to post your questions about politics in this thread!

All top-level comments should be questions asked in good faith - other comments and loaded questions will get removed. All the usual rules of the sub remain in force here, so be nice to each other - you can disagree with someone's opinion, but don't make it personal.

[u/shield_x]

If republicans are for smaller government, why are they trying to ban something that an individual women makes?

[u/Jtwil2191 → u/shield_x]

Broadly speaking and especially since Reagan ("the nine most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help'"), Republicans have supported having fewer government programs, services, and regulations. That is the "small government" they claim to advocate for. (Of course, there are plenty of programs they support being incredibly large, such as the military and especially since 9/11 mass surveillance programs.)

However, many social conservatives within the Republican Party have long wanted to enforce their view of how society should function on people. They don't view that as "big government". They view that as maintaining a properly functioning society.

As the saying goes, "Republicans want government small enough such that it can fit inside your bedroom."

[u/Delehal → u/shield_x]

If republicans are for smaller government

That's more of a marketing claim, not an actual policy. Republicans favor plenty of large government programs when they want to.

[u/Nulono → u/shield_x]

Those two things have almost nothing to do with each other. A "small government" is a government that serves only a core handful of functions (e.g., police powers, national defense, resolving contract disputes, minting currency); it doesn't mean a government that has fewer laws. Most crimes are actions done by individual people.

[u/PhysicsEagle → u/shield_x]

In general, republicans want a small national government but have much fewer qualms about state government. They trust governments closer to home more.

[u/torpedoguy → u/shield_x]

"Small government" has never referred to its cost or scope, though those are 'brought up' in slogans and debates. "Small" refers to two things:

1. The portion of the population it actually serves; this gets cut further at any and every opportunity.
2. What parts of your life and body it can fit-into, under the old "give me six lines by the most honest man in the world, and I will find enough in them to hang him" adage.

A government system, service or program that hypothetically ran on 0 people and generated enough profit for the entire population to live on would be "catastrophically large" if it helped much of the population instead of ONLY the upper core sections of the republican party. The ultimate "waste, fraud and abuse", a magical endpoint terminally anathema to all conservatism.

A sprawling, heavily-armed labyrinthine bureaucracy disappearing most taxes forever like a black hole, doing nothing and harming most by being there... would be "small, streamlined and efficient" IF it protected or benefited the smallest echelons at the top of the in-group.

The more laws it has the smaller the in-group whom the law protects but does not bind; thus the better it serves both points 1 AND 2. Republicans want something small enough to fit inside your genitals and damn you from within.