If the USA were a Commonwealth realm...?

[Ariddia]

A thought experiment. If the USA were a Commonwealth realm, like Canada or Australia for example, it would be a fully independent country and a voluntary member of the Commonwealth, but would symbolically recognise Queen Elizabeth II as head of state. In relation to the US, she would be "Queen of the United States", and the Crown of the US would be constitutionally separate from the Crown of the UK - meaning that the role, duties and prerogatives of the Queen of the USA would be defined solely and exclusively by the American Constitution, laws and people, not by Britain.

More to the point for this thought experiment, though, is that fact that the US would not have a President. Instead, it would have
* a Governor-General, serving as de facto head of state (technically as the Queen's representative), with a mostly ceremonial role and perhaps a few reserve powers; and
* a Prime Minister, chosen by the House of Representatives, or perhaps by Congress as a whole.

Citizens would of course still elect Congress. To become Prime Minister, a person would need to be a member of the House of Representatives, and he or she would need the support of a majority of members of the House. He or she would remain accountable to the House, having to face questions from the members of the House every week, and would have to resign as Prime Minister if he or she lost the support of the House.

The Governor-General would be a US citizen (of course) and would either be chosen by the Prime Minister or elected by Congress. The Prime Minister would exercise the reality of executive power, as he or she would be a politician with a mandate from the democratically elected House of Representatives. By contrast, the person chosen to be Governor-General would not be a politician. Having a ceremonial role, he or she would need to be a non-partisan, unifying figure.

So my question to you is this: If the USA were indeed a Commonwealth realm, who do you think would or should be the Prime Minister? And who do you think would or should be the Governor-General?

Bearing in mind that the Prime Minister would normally be the leader of the majority party in the House, and that the Governor-General should be chosen for his / her capacity to embody what is best about the American nation, in a unifying and non-partisan manner. (Think of Julie Payette in Canada, for example.)

(Yes, I know that this wouldn't happen, so there's no need to point it out. The purpose here is to look at who would exercise those functions if it were.)

[The Blaatschapen]

Biden as the de facto leader of the USA. So prime minister.

Kanye West Beyonce as governor-general.

[Ariddia]

Biden as the de facto leader of the USA. So prime minister.

The Democrats have a majority in the House, so if their method for choosing their party leader were the same in this hypothetical reality, and if Biden had himself won a seat in the HoR, I suppose it would indeed be him.

Kanye West Beyonce as governor-general.

She's not a US citizen, though, so not eligible. Amusing as that would be.

[Glorious Hong Kong]

Someone like Nikki Haley, Marco Rubio, Tom Cotton, or Mike Pompeo should be the Prime Minister. Dr. Anthony Fauci should be the Governor-General.

The U.S. could declare itself a parliamentary republic with the role of Governor-General being renamed to President. Singapore, India, Israel, and Ireland have already done so. Or America could install its own separate royal family similar to Fiji or Malaysia. The Kardashians and the Kennedys are the only families I can think of.

[Ariddia]

Dr. Anthony Fauci should be the Governor-General.

I had to look him up, but he would certainly seem like a good choice.

(You were thinking of Tonga, by the way, not Fiji. Fiji is a parliamentary republic of the Irish / Indian type.)

[The Three Palins]

The most populous Commonwealth countries drive on the left hand side of the road. I expect Americans will adopt the new rules with enthusiasm rivalled only by their adoption of the Metric system, and grow to enjoy the sound of cars colliding head-on at all hours of the day.

Except in the rural areas of course. Where they will show their disdain of the new rules by driving the same as always, bang down the center line.

[Thermodolia]

If the US was a Commonwealth realm Canada wouldn’t exist as it would be one with the US. The political Union would probably be called Columbia or British North America.

Though if the US was a Commonwealth realm and separate from Canada then the Prime Minister would probably be Pelosi again, after she had already held the position from 2007 to 2011. The Governor General would probably be Dr Fauchi

[The Reformed American Republic]

If we became a Commonwealth Realm, it wouldn't be bad to be honest.

[The Three Palins]

More to the point for this thought experiment, though, is that fact that the US would not have a President. Instead, it would have
* a Governor-General, serving as de facto head of state (technically as the Queen's representative), with a mostly ceremonial role and perhaps a few reserve powers; and
* a Prime Minister, chosen by the House of Representatives, or perhaps by Congress as a whole.

It seems all the Realm countries do have a Parliamentary system, and requiring the British Monarch to be Head of State does seem to prevent having a President in that role.

I see no reason the US couldn't have a President anyway. The sort-of President would have to give up some powers to the new Head of State, the Governor-General however styled. But it's not in the definition of Head of State that they need to have the President's veto powers or right to appoint a Cabinet.

In fact, the Monarch might agree to some arrangement where he/she customarily appoints as Governor-General whoever was duly elected every four years. That would be the President in all but name, while still retaining for the monarch emergency powers to appoint someone else if she really doesn't like who the people chose.

As long as you still have a decent old bird as Queen, it's the best of both worlds really. But there's a catch. You're not going to have the good old Queen for much longer. And you don't know if you'll get King Charles who seems decent enough but might decline, or King William who ... well it's best not to speak of ill of royalty so I won't.

[Luziyca]

If the USA were a commonwealth realm, it'd basically be Canada without Quebec.

[The Three Palins]

If the US was a Commonwealth realm Canada wouldn’t exist as it would be one with the US.

That's a rather parochial way of seeing it. It would be fairer to say neither country would exist any more!

Though actually the sacrifice of sovereignty is minor, joining the Realm, and does not imply any ownership of one country by another. I think it goes back to the formation of the United Kingdom itself, that Scotland and England by agreeing to share a Queen did not mean they ceased being distinct nations. The United Kingdom are more closely bound than the Realm of course, but even so it is legal for any of them to secede. Unlike it must be said, the US States which are not sovereign in that sense.

[Ariddia]

Though if the US was a Commonwealth realm and separate from Canada then the Prime Minister would probably be Pelosi again, after she had already held the position from 2007 to 2011. The Governor General would probably be Dr Fauchi

Makes sense.

and grow to enjoy the sound of cars colliding head-on at all hours of the day.

That sounds... festive.

If we became a Commonwealth Realm, it wouldn't be bad to be honest.

There are certain advantages to having a non-partisan head of state.

I see no reason the US couldn't have a President anyway. The sort-of President would have to give up some powers to the new Head of State, the Governor-General however styled. But it's not in the definition of Head of State that they need to have the President's veto powers or right to appoint a Cabinet.

In fact, the Monarch might agree to some arrangement where he/she customarily appoints as Governor-General whoever was duly elected every four years. That would be the President in all but name, while still retaining for the monarch emergency powers to appoint someone else if she really doesn't like who the people chose.

That could work, I suppose. Except that it would make the Governor-General a political figure, presumably a member of a political party, elected after campaigning on a set of policy proposals against other candidates with other proposals. So: a potentially divise figure, which Governors-General aren't supposed to be.

On the upside, if you had the Queen plus an executive Governor-General with no Prime Minister, you'd still have a non-partisan head of state (the Queen), without needing to divide functions between a Governor-General and a Prime Minister.

As long as you still have a decent old bird as Queen, it's the best of both worlds really. But there's a catch. You're not going to have the good old Queen for much longer. And you don't know if you'll get King Charles who seems decent enough but might decline, or King William who ... well it's best not to speak of ill of royalty so I won't.

Unless the Queen actually outlives Charles, I think he will become King.

[Luziyca]

More to the point for this thought experiment, though, is that fact that the US would not have a President. Instead, it would have
* a Governor-General, serving as de facto head of state (technically as the Queen's representative), with a mostly ceremonial role and perhaps a few reserve powers; and
* a Prime Minister, chosen by the House of Representatives, or perhaps by Congress as a whole.

It seems all the Realm countries do have a Parliamentary system, and requiring the British Monarch to be Head of State does seem to prevent having a President in that role.

I see no reason the US couldn't have a President anyway. The sort-of President would have to give up some powers to the new Head of State, the Governor-General however styled. But it's not in the definition of Head of State that they need to have the President's veto powers or right to appoint a Cabinet.

In fact, the Monarch might agree to some arrangement where he/she customarily appoints as Governor-General whoever was duly elected every four years. That would be the President in all but name, while still retaining for the monarch emergency powers to appoint someone else if she really doesn't like who the people chose.

As long as you still have a decent old bird as Queen, it's the best of both worlds really. But there's a catch. You're not going to have the good old Queen for much longer. And you don't know if you'll get King Charles who seems decent enough but might decline, or King William who ... well it's best not to speak of ill of royalty so I won't.

Would you rather have King Andrew ruling over the USA over William or Charles?

[Middle Barael]

Realistically, I think that Kamala Harris would be the most likely since she could easily count on he support of both the moderate and even most progressives, as opposed to folks such as Bernie, Pelosi, Biden, Bloomberg, or AOC. I do think that Buttigieg or Stacey Abrams would also be popular, but not as popular

[American Pere Housh]

Realistically, I think that Kamala Harris would be the most likely since she could easily count on he support of both the moderate and even most progressives, as opposed to folks such as Bernie, Pelosi, Biden, Bloomberg, or AOC. I do think that Buttigieg or Stacey Abrams would also be popular, but not as popular

Most of these people aren't even in the HoR and as for AOC becoming Prime Minister, pigs will have to be flying before that happens.

[Costa Fierro]

So my question to you is this: If the USA were indeed a Commonwealth realm, who do you think would or should be the Prime Minister? And who do you think would or should be the Governor-General?

If the US kept the same system bar the Electoral College, but had a bicameral legislature like Canada and Australia, then Biden would likely be Prime Minister.

As for who would be Governor General, literally anyone. In most Commonwealth Realms, the Prime Minister makes the recommendation for Governor General to the Queen.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Now you listen here, sonny. We didn't beat those God damn Tory sons-of-bitches back over the pond just so they could weasel their way into our free and fair system! Good, honest patriots died telling the King to go fuck himself and you bet your ass that good, honest patriots won't stand by as the Queen takes his place! Those damn Redcoats come back and you bet your hiney General Washington's ghost will rise from the grave to lay into 'em till they're seeing Red, White, and Blue before he dumps 'em in the Boston Harbor with the tea they brought with 'em!

[Theberstan]

Citizens of the Commonwealth... do not interfere... we are... the Brothehood of Steel.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Citizens of the Commonwealth... do not interfere... we are... the Brothehood of Steel.

>Todd still trying to make the Brotherhood cool

*vomits*

[Romextly]

I mean, this isn't even possible. But I mean, if it was, then Biden would probably be the PM

[Theberstan]

Citizens of the Commonwealth... do not interfere... we are... the Brothehood of Steel.

>Todd still trying to make the Brotherhood cool

*vomits*

Lol, the East Coast BoS: Eh, okay.
West Coast BoS: Oh now! Thews scawy momstows ouwtside.
/skipme

[Old Tyrannia]

It would probably be better governed.

[Sanghyeok]

I read this as communist and paused for a moment.

[Costa Fierro]

More to the point for this thought experiment, though, is that fact that the US would not have a President. Instead, it would have
* a Governor-General, serving as de facto head of state (technically as the Queen's representative), with a mostly ceremonial role and perhaps a few reserve powers; and
* a Prime Minister, chosen by the House of Representatives, or perhaps by Congress as a whole.

Why would the Prime Minister be chosen by the house of representatives? This isn't how it works in any Commonwealth realm.

The Prime Minister is the head of the party that either has a majority, or is the largest party in a coalition, in Parliament.

[Mississippi River Country]

If you mean we just take USA now and follow those rules I'll guess HRC would be in the position to be PM. Or very likely Obama since PMs in Canada don't have term limits.

Governor General might be someone like Elizabeth Warren or unironically Oprah Winfrey.

It is hard to say because the USA would look so different if it hadn't been a republic, much more whig, maybe Louisiana stays french, Northern Mexico ... who knows?