Questions for the Prime Minister

Not a bad idea.

The appearance is Axelrod-designed posturing to reach out to independents via signalling , but still, the results might be healthy in a minor way. Decades of gerrymandering has created so many “safe” districts that the House has become far more polarized in political terms than the voting public as Congressmen increasingly represent only their party’s activist base – and sometimes only the extreme edge of that. Then the majoritarian rules of the House aggravate partisan feelings of people already inclined to lack goodwill towards one another.

The POTUS for his part lives in a rarefied bubble that cuts him off from the public and shields him from disagreement or politically unwelcome points of view. Going in to the lion’s den from time to time keeps the wits sharp and brings a wider range of voices into the debate.

2 comments on this post.
  1. Joseph Fouche:

    I’m reminded of this formative episode:

    [O]n August 22, 1789, the president visited the Senate to receive its advice and consent for an Indian treaty. He occupied the presiding officer’s chair while Senate President John Adams sat at the desk assigned to the Senate’s secretary. Intimidated by Washington’s presence, senators found it difficult to concentrate on the treaty’s provisions as Adams read them aloud. After hearing the contents of several supporting documents, members decided they needed more time. An angry president spoke for the first time during the proceedings: "This defeats every purpose of my being here!" Although he returned two days later to observe additional debate and the treaty’s approval, he conducted all further treaty business with the Senate in writing.

  2. "Question Time" | T. Greer -- The Scholar's Stage:

    […]As Zenpundit notes, functions like these take the President out of his "rarefied bubble" and expose him to ideas not common currency in the White House.[…]