• HiTekRedNek@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    You’re missing the entire point. It’s not about their governmental powers, it’s about their party affiliation, and the ability to shape a public narrative.

    What actual governmental power did any of the VPs in our history have?

    None. But they still had an effect on policy simply by being in the public spotlight.

    Can you imagine if the VICE PRESIDENT came out and started saying the president is wrong?

    It removes an echo chamber. Or at least makes it harder. Quit thinking in terms of what can the government position do, and start thinking in terms of how can politicians influence the rest of the government.

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      They had an effect because they were invited to the party. A VP of an opposing party wouldn’t be in the room. Instead of VP Cheney orgastrating a war it would be Chief of Policy or secretary of presidential affairs Cheney doing that.

      The VP being a prominent figurehead of workgroups or policies only exists because the president allows it. A non aligned VP wouldn’t be any more impactful than a current opposition party leader.

      A president doesn’t have to share everything with a VP, famously Truman was never informed about the Manhattan project until he became president. That would likely be the norm in a case where president and VP were opposed.