The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
UK Prime Minister = White House Chief of Staff
| big stubborn regret keepsake machete | 07/05/24 |
| smoky address | 07/05/24 |
| Disgusting bull headed milk kitty | 07/05/24 |
| big stubborn regret keepsake machete | 07/05/24 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: July 5th, 2024 5:41 PM Author: big stubborn regret keepsake machete That's the math. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5550941&forum_id=2Reputation#47812961) |
Date: July 5th, 2024 5:50 PM Author: smoky address i am not disagreeing but can you show your work (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5550941&forum_id=2Reputation#47812978) |
 |
Date: July 5th, 2024 5:57 PM Author: Disgusting bull headed milk kitty OP is a moron who thinks full of smart and edgy political commentary. dont engage (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5550941&forum_id=2Reputation#47812993) |
|
Date: July 5th, 2024 6:00 PM Author: big stubborn regret keepsake machete Both position evolved out of something totally different. CoS originally was just the secretary who kept the POTUS' calendar. Over time that person gained the ability to just tell you what the President thinks about that without even putting you on his calendar.
PM only seems that way to me because in all other respects they seem subordinate to the reigning monarch. The process by which one becomes elevated through the ranks to become a contender seems designed to appeal to what everyone thinks the monarch will be looking for in a PM. The actual PMs themselves are throwaways. I say this after taking a deep dive into the history of UK Prime Ministers, how they are selected, and how all of this is understood within the context of UK law. People who claim that the monarch only rules "symbolically" can't point to anything that supports that claim, whereas the laws are focused almost exclusively on how the PM relates to the monarch. |