HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,850
- 113
That’s not at all what I said. A senator has the option to abstain; the president doesn’t. It isn’t really a “move” when it’s structurally mandated.
But this is a dumb argument. I don’t think it’s worth praising Trump for this. He had two options and picked one. Big whoop.
How are vetoes "structurally mandated"? Some presidents have issued several hundred, others never issued any. It's an explicit discretionary power of presidents, and while Trump is relatively lazy overall using the veto pen, his use of it now has potentially significant and positive ramifications. By contrast, I'm pretty sure abstention isn't an explicit choice written into the Constitution; it's obviously not illegal to be absent for votes in Congress, but it's certainly less of a move to not move your hand than it is to cast a veto.