Does the US even need a President?

[Haiyellovi]

The US did have a president.
Being Republican ≠ incompetence every time.

Don’t take the bait dude. There are just some people who have tunnel vision when it comes politics.

Let's ask the real question, does the US even need the US?

Unless you want the quality of life of millions of people to dramatically drop and possibly start a war that kills thousands, if not millions, yes.

[-Astoria-]

What would you reccomend as a replacement, then?

[Nejii]

Oh God...

[Cetacea]

What would you reccomend as a replacement, then?

No replacement for President, instead Congress would be the Executive Authority in the country, The House of Reps would appoint the PM/Premier from their number and the PM would appoint cabinet from the House.
I understand that in the current system Senate ratifies appointment of VP? In the new system the PM might be directly accountable to Senate and via them the States.

[-Astoria-]

No replacement for President, instead Congress would be the Executive Authority in the country

America is not Switzerland, & may not work as well either.

The House of Reps would appoint the PM/Premier from their number

Mm, no; I'd quite prefer having someone... you know... being elected by the people (without the electoral college hopefully, but eh, what can ye do?).

and the PM would appoint cabinet from the House.

Now that, I can support.

I understand that in the current system Senate ratifies appointment of VP? In the new system the PM might be directly accountable to Senate and via them the States.

1. IIRC I don't think so; wouldn't they be tagged on along with the president?
2. Or even better; be directly accountable to the House, & leave the Senate as is.

[ImperialRussia]

Why need a two party system

[Drongonia]

I feel like these threads are getting more and more silly.

[Nasty Nephew]

I feel like these threads are getting more and more silly.

Next: "Does the President even need the US?"

[Nasty Nephew]

Why need a two party system

A bit better than a one party system. Do you need more reasons?

[The Alma Mater]

Why need a two party system

A bit better than a one party system. Do you need more reasons?

From the perspective of other western countries with a coalition government the USA currently has a one party system. Democrats and Republicans are so close together they would be a single party amongst many in their spectrum.

[Phoenicaea]

the collective government, where legislative body has a prominence, has been proof in xixi.th century, in revolutionary ages, and plausibly will be. i do not see how it can happen nowadays, still..who knows.

[Bengal and Assam]

How about a multiparty Westminster system of governance? A Prime Minister, accountable to the House of Representatives would call the shots regarding executive matters.
With the President being a ceremonial figurehead, or maybe bring back the Queen or something. Idk.

[The Three Palins]

the collective government, where legislative body has a prominence, has been proof in xixi.th century, in revolutionary ages, and plausibly will be. i do not see how it can happen nowadays, still..who knows.

Why make your point even harder to get by using Roman numerals? Is it some subtle point about how successful the Romans were despite sucking at math?


EDIT: This was my 100th post. The irony!

[Western Fardelshufflestein]

This thread is still going? Guys, we need to appoint King Alastair IV of Western Fardelshufflestein as Absolute Monarch of the United States. I'm sure that will end well.

[-Astoria-]

This thread is still going? Guys, we need to appoint King Alastair IV of Western Fardelshufflestein as Absolute Monarch of the United States. I'm sure that will end well.

Sir, he does not exist.

[Western Fardelshufflestein]

This thread is still going? Guys, we need to appoint King Alastair IV of Western Fardelshufflestein as Absolute Monarch of the United States. I'm sure that will end well.

Sir, he does not exist.

YES, HE DOTH. AS A FICTIONAL CHARACTER. AND IF AMERICA GETS RID OF THE PRESIDENCY IN AN ALTERNATE REALM, IT SHOULD BE WHERE WF IS SO WF CAN ANNEX AMERICA.

[The Three Palins]

Sir, he does not exist.

YES, HE DOTH. AS A FICTIONAL CHARACTER. AND IF AMERICA GETS RID OF THE PRESIDENCY IN AN ALTERNATE REALM, IT SHOULD BE WHERE WF IS SO WF CAN ANNEX AMERICA.

Shouting is bad form even in roleplaying. And aren't you forbidden to that here, anyway?

General
For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

[The Alma Mater]

This thread is still going? Guys, we need to appoint King Alastair IV of Western Fardelshufflestein as Absolute Monarch of the United States. I'm sure that will end well.

Sir, he does not exist.

Neither do the states of New California and New Nevada, nor Edison county, Michigan.
Nowadays it seems that does not matter.

[The Three Palins]

Sir, he does not exist.

Neither do the states of New California and New Nevada, nor Edison county, Michigan.
Nowadays it seems that does not matter.

Give a lawyer a break, they're not all Super Geography Brain. There's not much time for that in law school, and when was the last time a lawyer needed a geographer to stay out of jail?

So what they got a town and a county mixed up, that happens. The town was in the wrong state, OK, but that happens too. Mister Super Geography Brain.

[Risottia]

Considering how many countries don't have presidents, the US doesn't really need one, but changing the system would be hard.

The countries who don't have presidents have either monarchs or supreme guides or emperors or supreme pontiffs, iirc.

[Behaved]

Okay yes I realise the its in the Constitution and stuff but could the USA work even without a President?

As I understand it Congress makes the legislation and currently has to approve any official appointments, executive orders and declarations of war made by the President. So why not cut out the middle man? Ie Does Congress have the capacity to do those things directly?

How much would it upset the system? States would still have their representatives, the Military would be subject to Congress, The Supreme Court would still exist to interpret Law and provide judicial review on Congress.

So NSG is a USA with No President viable? Is it desirable?

I’m not from the US so might be missing something and Im a monarchist and thus prefer a non-partisan Head of State beholden to Tradition rather than politic, but I’m considering alternatives that might apply in the USA - (I suppose in absence of a President does the Speaker of the House become HOS?)

There needs to be head of state and of the executive branch.

[The Three Palins]

Okay yes I realise the its in the Constitution and stuff but could the USA work even without a President?

As I understand it Congress makes the legislation and currently has to approve any official appointments, executive orders and declarations of war made by the President. So why not cut out the middle man? Ie Does Congress have the capacity to do those things directly?

How much would it upset the system? States would still have their representatives, the Military would be subject to Congress, The Supreme Court would still exist to interpret Law and provide judicial review on Congress.

So NSG is a USA with No President viable? Is it desirable?

I’m not from the US so might be missing something and Im a monarchist and thus prefer a non-partisan Head of State beholden to Tradition rather than politic, but I’m considering alternatives that might apply in the USA - (I suppose in absence of a President does the Speaker of the House become HOS?)

There needs to be head of state and of the executive branch.

Or you could have a head of state, another of the executive branch, and some clown from the Supreme Court, united in a triumvirate!

I know, I know, but it doesn't hurt to have some imagination when designing a system to last for centuries. Benjamin Franklin taught us that.

[Celritannia]

Considering how many countries don't have presidents, the US doesn't really need one, but changing the system would be hard.

More countries do have Presidents, but they are mainly ceremonial and weak, like the President of Germany.

A country may have a strong Prime Minister/Chancellor due to a Parliamentary System, but that doesn't mean the country does not have a President as a figurehead.

[Baldwin Park]

I think that the United States should keep the presidential system but abolish the electoral college.

[The Three Palins]

Considering how many countries don't have presidents, the US doesn't really need one, but changing the system would be hard.

More countries do have Presidents, but they are mainly ceremonial and weak, like the President of Germany.

A country may have a strong Prime Minister/Chancellor due to a Parliamentary System, but that doesn't mean the country does not have a President as a figurehead.

Got figures on that "more countries do have Presidents" cos I think you might be slipping in a few dictators there, masquerading as Presidents just because they have some kind of People's Congress with no power at all ...

The same rule applies to Parliaments as to nation names. A Congress is just a congress. A People's Congress is some people who congregate but have no connection to the People. And a Democratic People's Congress is some people who congregate but have no connection to the People or to Power.

Though it sounds like an easy gig to be a parliamentarian in a Democratic People's Congress, it's a bit of a dud. El Presidente isn't remotely interested in what you have to say, and instead of raking in bribes for favors you can do those of the people who can afford to pay bribes, you have to bribe taxi drivers to take you anywhere. Danger money I guess.