The A Level Politics Show

A bad press headline here, a trust-sapping scandal there, and a party divided on the important issue of the day. Any party can hope to survive and even thrive with just one of these negative occurrences. Combine all three though, and party success will ebb away, perhaps for a generation. Which factor matters most, though? In this podcast, I argue that leaders matter far more in determining the success of their parties - their command (or lack thereof) of their brief affects the image of their parties and the trust voters have in them, leaving the press ready to feast on the carcass. Much of the content from this podcast can be found in my revision textbook. Go and buy it by clicking on this link: amzn.to/3EUnOyl Like the podcast? Then why not subscribe to A Level Politics Show PLUS PLUS PLUS? In addition to the monthly free episode , you'll receive TWO additional podcasts each month to help you with your studies. Once they are released, these bonus episodes will will appear automatically in your podcast feed. Subscribe now to PLUS PLUS PLUS for a fantastic price of £1.99 per month. Just click the following link to get started: https://anchor.fm/nick-de-souza/subscribe

This episode compares the constitutional standing of the two leaders, the accountability they have to their legislatures (or lack thereof) and their ability to control their cabinets. For those listening before the 2022 public exam, this is one question you’ll want to practice: Analyse the relative power of the UK PM and US President. If you like this podcast, why not rate it happy and leave a positive review! Or/and buy my book - available cheap for a limited time on Amazon by clicking the link: amzn.to/3EUnOyl Like the podcast? Then why not subscribe to A Level Politics Show PLUS PLUS PLUS? In addition to the monthly free episode , you'll receive TWO additional podcasts each month. Once they are released, these bonus episodes will will appear automatically in your podcast feed. Subscribe now to PLUS PLUS PLUS for a fantastic price of £1.99 per month. Just click the following link to get started: https://anchor.fm/nick-de-souza/subscribe Thank you so much for supporting the show. 

The US constitution, forged in the aftermath of revolution, blends specificity with vagueness, formal entrenchment with interpretive possibility. Supporters argue that this mix of rigidity and flexibility allows it to protect its key features, such checks and balances, the separation of powers and federalism, while at the same time give provision for evolution. Yet its detractors point to the consequences, including a near impossible amendment hurdle that empowers unelected judges. They also point to the dual problem of, on the one hand, an overt precision that forces contemporary lawmakers to respect outdated practices and, on the other, a lack of clarity which creates the the very tension the founding fathers hoped to resolve. I hope you enjoy this show and find it useful. If you do, why not leave a lovely review wherever you download you podcasts. Oh, and buy the book for more A Level Politics goodness. https://amzn.to/3EUnOyl Like the podcast? Then why not subscribe to A Level Politics Show PLUS PLUS PLUS? In addition to the monthly free episode , you'll receive TWO additional podcasts each month. Once they are released, these bonus episodes will will appear automatically in your podcast feed. Subscribe now to PLUS PLUS PLUS for a fantastic price of £1.99 per month. Just click the following link to get started: https://anchor.fm/nick-de-souza/subscribe Thank you so much for supporting the show.

There are two conventions that are supposed to ensure that ministers act responsibly - collective and individual. In this podcast, I argue that collective ministerial responsibility remains intact, despite coalition, Brexit and the pandemic. Yet ministers are increasingly failing to take individual ministerial responsibility for their actions. While Matt Hancock resigned over breaking social distancing rules, Boris Johnson hasn’t. In politics as in life, standards are set, or not set, at the top. If you enjoy this podcast, check out the book! Available here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1398325538/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_glt_i_T3N9200TPEB2Q87Z64D8 Like the podcast? Then why not subscribe to The A Level Politics Show PLUS PLUS PLUS? In addition to the monthly free episode , you'll receive TWO additional podcasts each month. Once they are released, these bonus episodes will will appear automatically in your podcast feed. Subscribe now to PLUS PLUS PLUS for a fantastic price of £1.99 per month. Just click the following link to get started: https://anchor.fm/nick-de-souza/subscribe Thank you so much for supporting the show.

In this episode, we compare the power and status of the highest courts in both countries. On the surface, both courts appear relatively similar. They both enjoy the power of judicial review and are entirely separate from other branches of government. Yet the different constitutional arrangements in the US allows its Supreme Court far more extensive influence. That said, the appointment process in the UK is far less politicised, perhaps inhibiting the ability of politicians to shape it how they see fit. So yes, the US Supreme Court is more powerful overall, but UK Supreme Court is starting to find its feet. If you like this show, perhaps you’ll like my new revision book. Pre-order it now: www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1398325538/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_glt_fabc_BYFD19W27DH384S0S677

While public bill committees lack the tools for genuine scrutiny of legislation, select committees do a pretty decent job of holding government to account. Perhaps it is time merge the functions of parliamentary committees so that ordinary backbenchers could have a genuinely important role in shaping the laws of the country. What do you think? Let me know by getting in touch on Twitter (@nickdesouza). If you like the show, why not pre-order my UK politics revision book. https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1398325538/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_glt_fabc_FQ5PXFE1WJMJ8FXQMNJ3 Like the podcast? Then why not subscribe to The A Level Politics Show PLUS PLUS PLUS? In addition to the monthly free episode , you'll receive TWO additional podcasts each month. Once they are released, these bonus episodes will will appear automatically in your podcast feed. Subscribe now to PLUS PLUS PLUS for a fantastic price of £1.99 per month. Just click the following link to get started: https://anchor.fm/nick-de-souza/subscribe Thank you so much for supporting the show.

While Congress can declare war, block diplomats from taking up their posts and withhold funding for war, the president largely calls the shots when it comes to US foreign policy. The early days of the Biden presidency has shown how the commander-in-chief can set the tone and decide upon who to call friend and foe. There will always be times when a President is questioned more, particularly when a policy goes awry. Yet more often than not a President will act as they see fit, not as other politicians do.

How unified are The Democrats? This podcast examines party divides over social and moral issues, economic policy and the role of the federal government in welfare, to determine whether progressive Democrats are able to work with moderates. We come to the conclusion that the divides between the factions are not insurmountable, as the early days of the Biden administration has shown. The party is arguably more unified, helped by the opposition to Trump, than it has ever been. Tensions are creative rather than destructive. Meanwhile, if you like this podcast then have a think about pre-ordering my revision guide. You can do this by clicking on this link: https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1398325538/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_fabc_545730Z55AZVQ2ZMBC6F Enjoy! Like the podcast? Then why not subscribe to The A Level Politics Show PLUS PLUS PLUS? In addition to the monthly free episode , you'll receive TWO additional podcasts each month. Once they are released, these bonus episodes will will appear automatically in your podcast feed. Subscribe now to PLUS PLUS PLUS for a fantastic price of £1.99 per month. Just click the following link to get started: https://anchor.fm/nick-de-souza/subscribe Thank you so much for supporting the show.

Measures to regulate money and the influence it brings to those who spend it in US elections have failed. Campaign finance laws were crafted for a different era and in any case were gutted by the Supreme Court. The net effect is to leave US democracy poorer and special interests more powerful than ever before. By the way, I had wanted to play ABBA’s Money Money Money at the end of this episode but something went wrong. So perhaps you might like to hum it instead. Like the podcast? Then why not subscribe to The A Level Politics Show PLUS PLUS PLUS? In addition to the monthly free episode , you'll receive TWO additional podcasts each month. Once they are released, these bonus episodes will will appear automatically in your podcast feed. Subscribe now to PLUS PLUS PLUS for a fantastic price of £1.99 per month. Just click the following link to get started: https://anchor.fm/nick-de-souza/subscribe Thank you so much for supporting the show.

Imagine receiving a call from the US President? Or being invited to a White House dinner? These methods and others like them have been used by all presidents to get lawmakers to do what presidents want them to do. Yet in the era of hyper-partisanship, this use of soft power is largely redundant. Presidents have resorted instead to using direct authority to bypass the hurdles that the constitution puts in place. Yet rather than showing a lack of necessity to persuade, these approaches indicate the weaknesses of presidents when persuasion is not possible or desirable. Yes, powerful presidents might not need to persuade, but most presidents are not powerful for long. Ultimately, the importance of persuasion depends on the capacity of the office holder (no point trying if you are not very good at it), and the circumstances in which they find themselves. Like the podcast? Then why not subscribe to The A Level Politics Show PLUS PLUS PLUS? In addition to the monthly free episode , you'll receive TWO additional podcasts each month. Once they are released, these bonus episodes will will appear automatically in your podcast feed. Subscribe now to PLUS PLUS PLUS for a fantastic price of £1.99 per month. Just click the following link to get started: https://anchor.fm/nick-de-souza/subscribe Thank you so much for supporting the show.

In this episode, I try (badly) to introduce you to the “disagree/agree” sandwich format of writing ideologies essays. Warning: there is a dubious analogy to beef burgers. Halloumi is mentioned too. At some point, the divides over the economy are discussed. Apologies for a very noisy fridge in the background - it makes a change from the cat, I suppose. Like the podcast? Then why not subscribe to The A Level Politics Show PLUS PLUS PLUS? In addition to the monthly free episode , you'll receive TWO additional podcasts each month. Once they are released, these bonus episodes will will appear automatically in your podcast feed. Subscribe now to PLUS PLUS PLUS for a fantastic price of £1.99 per month. Just click the following link to get started: https://anchor.fm/nick-de-souza/subscribe Thank you so much for supporting the show.

When the HRA was passed in 1998, few could have imagined its impact on UK Politics. It seemed to merely confirm the rights that had already existed - those written into the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Yet in giving UK citizens to the right to use UK courts to seek redress of grievance, legal avenues to claim rights came closer to the people. No longer would they have to travel to Strasbourg to fight for their rights in the European Court of Human Rights (although they still could), the guarantor of the ECHR. Yet the backlash against a so-called rights culture has been severe. Successive Conservative governments have promised to either scrap or “update”, to replace it with a bill of rights or kill it altogether. Despite the assault on the HRA, it remains in place, for now. Like the podcast? Then why not subscribe to The A Level Politics Show PLUS PLUS PLUS? In addition to the monthly free episode , you'll receive TWO additional podcasts each month. Once they are released, these bonus episodes will will appear automatically in your podcast feed. Subscribe now to PLUS PLUS PLUS for a fantastic price of £1.99 per month. Just click the following link to get started: https://anchor.fm/nick-de-souza/subscribe Thank you so much for supporting the show.

In the last episode of the current series (don’t worry - we’ll be back soon!), we compare legislative output with legislative quality. Parliament is good at the former but not at the latter. The fusion of powers, the limited opportunities for ordinary MPs to shape law and the curbs on the House of Lords all serve to give the government too much of an advantage. Yes, we get laws passed, but are they any good? Like the podcast? Then why not subscribe to The A Level Politics Show PLUS PLUS PLUS? In addition to the monthly free episode , you'll receive TWO additional podcasts each month. Once they are released, these bonus episodes will will appear automatically in your podcast feed. Subscribe now to PLUS PLUS PLUS for a fantastic price of £1.99 per month. Just click the following link to get started: https://anchor.fm/nick-de-souza/subscribe Thank you so much for supporting the show.

If we were to judge success by what we preferred, it is likely that we would view presidents very differently. It is far easier to judge success by whether presidents achieve what they set out to do. In this regard, Clinton, Bush Jnr, Obama and Trump all have one thing in common: their success depends almost entirely upon circumstance.

How should the United States Supreme Court arrive at decisions? Should it look to the founding fathers and take a literal approach, treating the US constitution as a dead piece of parchment? Or should it accept the flaws in the founding documents, as well as in those who created them, and take a more flexible view? Justice Scalia posed the question, “Who made you king?” when referring to activist judges who “read between the lines” to find new rights. Yet, ultimately, the answer to that question is that founding fathers did, by creating a system that was rigid and difficult to change, thrusting the court into the unenviable position of umpire. Like the podcast? Then why not subscribe to The A Level Politics Show PLUS PLUS PLUS? In addition to the monthly free episode , you'll receive TWO additional podcasts each month. Once they are released, these bonus episodes will will appear automatically in your podcast feed. Subscribe now to PLUS PLUS PLUS for a fantastic price of £1.99 per month. Just click the following link to get started: https://anchor.fm/nick-de-souza/subscribe Thank you so much for supporting the show.

Modern and Classical Liberals might well place greater emphasis on the individual than the “common good”, but they are at odds over the usefulness of that society in helping individuals to realise their potential. On the one hand, Classical Liberals see societal pressure as deeply constraining, while on the other Modern Liberals believe that individuals can only be truly free if enabling conditions exist for that to happen.

There are many arguments against giving certain minority groups “preferential treatment”. It is, critics claim, unAmerican, unfair, unnecessary and unworkable. I argue that none of these criticisms have merit, especially so in America. Indeed, the case for affirmative action is stronger than ever, given the institutionalised racism of the US justice system and the permissive culture of white nationalism that has been promulgated by Donald Trump. Like the podcast? Then why not subscribe to The A Level Politics Show PLUS PLUS PLUS? In addition to the monthly free episode , you'll receive TWO additional podcasts each month. Once they are released, these bonus episodes will will appear automatically in your podcast feed. Subscribe now to PLUS PLUS PLUS for a fantastic price of £1.99 per month. Just click the following link to get started: https://anchor.fm/nick-de-souza/subscribe Thank you so much for supporting the show.

While most feminists accept that the state can play a role in ending gender inequality, they disagree on how the state should go about it, and some even question whether they should even try. Most feminists, however, believe that women’s liberation cannot be imposed without women taking action themselves to bring it about. Like the podcast? Then why not subscribe to The A Level Politics Show PLUS PLUS PLUS? In addition to the monthly free episode , you'll receive TWO additional podcasts each month. Once they are released, these bonus episodes will will appear automatically in your podcast feed. Subscribe now to PLUS PLUS PLUS for a fantastic price of £1.99 per month. Just click the following link to get started: https://anchor.fm/nick-de-souza/subscribe Thank you so much for supporting the show.

It used to be taken as read that a member of Congress would vote the way the folks back home told them to. The lure of pork-barrel politics and of earmarking - supporting a bill in return for federal funds - perpetuated the idea that all that drove members of Congress was re-election. Yet with earmark reform and the continued corrosiveness of gerrymandering, satisfying constituents became less essential. Instead, the greatest concern to members of the House of Representatives now comes from the threat of a primary challenge. Thus, the need to satisfy the party and to brandish ideological credentials has usurped constituent pressure as the most important factor in how a politician casts their vote. (PAPER 3) Like the podcast? Then why not subscribe to The A Level Politics Show PLUS PLUS PLUS? In addition to the monthly free episode , you'll receive TWO additional podcasts each month. Once they are released, these bonus episodes will will appear automatically in your podcast feed. Subscribe now to PLUS PLUS PLUS for a fantastic price of £1.99 per month. Just click the following link to get started: https://anchor.fm/nick-de-souza/subscribe Thank you so much for supporting the show.

Even Rand support the need for a state, while admittedly she argued that the “strong state is the small state”. Nearly all conservatives believe in a central authority that keeps the peace. Yet when it comes to economic matters, the differences start to emerge. (PAPER 1) Like the podcast? Then why not subscribe to The A Level Politics Show PLUS PLUS PLUS? In addition to the monthly free episode , you'll receive TWO additional podcasts each month. Once they are released, these bonus episodes will will appear automatically in your podcast feed. Subscribe now to PLUS PLUS PLUS for a fantastic price of £1.99 per month. Just click the following link to get started: https://anchor.fm/nick-de-souza/subscribe Thank you so much for supporting the show.