Dees
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri May-06-05 06:08 PM
Original message |
Do we absolutely need a President? |
|
Can't we govern by council or some such entity?
We've got this sold out, struttin about ass thinking he's a brilliant leader. The little bastard is in way over his head.
Couldn't democracy be better served by not having so much power in hands of someone as arrogant and deadly as *? It may be time to think about restructuring this whole government thing.
|
ayeshahaqqiqa
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri May-06-05 06:15 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Personally, I think the British model of government |
|
is much more responsive to situations and the will of the people. For example, if Nixon had been PM instead of President, there would have been a vote of no confidence in '73 and he would have been out of office long before he resigned. The other thing is that the head of state is different than the head of government-so the danger of a cult of personality around the leader is less. Just think, we could elect a President for Life-somebody most everyone admires. He/She doesn't involve in politics, but does state visits, makes visits around the country, etc.
|
CarefullyLiberal
(182 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri May-06-05 06:16 PM
Response to Original message |
|
1.) My trash picked up 2.) My water to be clean 3.) ...and my beer to be cold, ( sorry, had to add that one)
Time for a constitutional convention.
-Fergus
|
Selteri
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri May-06-05 06:21 PM
Response to Original message |
3. It would still have it's flaws, but a parlamentary system is |
|
slowly looking like it would be better for the people since that tends to be a more liberally based system of govenrment.
Either way, the most important thing is education, something this country has forgotten.
|
oscar111
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri May-06-05 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. Swiss have 3 prez's: we put three at head of Iraq too |
|
Edited on Fri May-06-05 06:30 PM by oscar111
They could .. ours that is.. could live together constantly so any sudden decision could be always a vote two of three.
it's just too much power for one brain.
RULE: the more power flowing in the pipe to the faucet, the more people you put at the faucet handle.
eg, the Supreme Court has final power here. So they should have hundreds of elected judges.. similar to the House. Makes it harder to bribe so many. With a few , you could bribe all nine judges easily if you have a billion dollars. ten million each, just pocket money.
Plus, two heads smarter than one. A Single prez will not be as wise as three.
|
Selteri
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri May-06-05 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
6. Parlamentar Triumvirate, what a classical seeming concept |
|
and a very good idea, I could see it working much better, especially it we can ever gain a truely malti-party system.
|
MissWaverly
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri May-06-05 06:34 PM
Response to Original message |
5. elected as president does not make him God |
|
do not know why there is no recall options built into our democracy, and why there is no real recount process in this country, the recounts were a total joke, also the electoral college should go, if the president is truly to represent the people of this country, then he should be elected by them and not the electoral college. This would eliminate the vote rigging of the swing states. Also I think there should be definite rules against nepotism. You should not run for president if you have a relative that is the governor of a state.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed May 08th 2024, 12:54 AM
Response to Original message |