> If the President gets elected promising to fire executive branch employees, then his doing so is literally democratic.
You seem to think the President can do whatever he wants, in constrained by laws. Which may be true in this case, but because the laws aren’t being followed, not because they don’t exist.
What I think is that electing the president is the only way the constitution provides for democratic control of what’s become the largest and most powerful branch. And ensuring democratic responsiveness of the executive—a civil service that will diligently execute the agenda of whomever is elected President—is of overriding importance to the health of democracy.
A country where the same people are in charge regardless of who wins the election isn’t a democracy. And I think this shouldn’t be a partisan point, because the federal bureaucracy in the aggregate is like the worst parts of the Obama and Bush administrations mushed together.
You seem to think the President can do whatever he wants, in constrained by laws. Which may be true in this case, but because the laws aren’t being followed, not because they don’t exist.