Talking about policies among Presidential candidates is, ultimately, silly

[Recursion]

The Presidency is not a policy job, and Presidents only rarely make policy decisions.

Until we spend this intensity vetting Senate candidates, this is all just performative. In terms of legislation passed there's really not much difference in what any of the major candidates' administrations would look like except that I think Sanders would score more a few more own goals than any of the rest. There's just not going to be Medicare For All or student debt forgiveness (or even a Freedom Dividend) in the next four years. And the Presidential race isn't the place to be having this discussion anyways because the President doesn't make those decisions.

Too many people seem to think their vote is a way to express themselves, like it's a performance art piece or something. This is both wrong and dangerous. A vote for President is a chance to limit some amount of potential damage. That's all.

[PETRUS]

1. There's some truth to that.

Certainly the kinds of policies that get much of the attention rely on congressional action (and supreme court decisions), but the executive branch does wield a fair amount of power. The American Prospect has identified "30 meaningful executive actions, all derived from authority in specific statutes, which could be implemented on Day One by a new president," which would involve fighting climate change, lowering prescription drug prices, and reigning in monopolies, among other things.