Isn’t it time we reconsidered the office of the U.S. presidency?

Should a single man, subject to personal biases, political pressures, and limited perspectives, hold such overwhelming power over national and foreign policy? Is that really democracy, or collective governance?

Top | New | Old

Roundandroundwego · 61-69

Nah, that's not the problem.
The issues really are systemic and political. You can't go there. You're completely powerless or you are like me - left out, the enemy

Jokersswild

@Roundandroundwego People like you and me don't stand a chance. It takes massive amounts of money from billionaire donors and strict loyalty to the political establishment. The only senator in the U.S. Senate today with any influence outside the two major parties is Bernie Sanders, who identifies as an independent. And that's because Vermont has long stood apart politically from much of the country, since the days of the Underground Railroad.

Roundandroundwego · 61-69

@Jokersswild yes. The apocalypse is the will of the US majority.

BohoBabe · M

Well we're supposed to have three branches of government so that no one person has that much power. Unfortunately, when one party completely rejects checks and balances, it becomes possible for one person to become a dictator.

Jokersswild

@BohoBabe Right, that responsibility falls to the judicial system, but the SCOTUS is currently dominated by a two-thirds right-wing majority. They have no interest in challenging Trump’s unconstitutional policies.

BohoBabe · M

@Jokersswild Also, Congress can't remove Trump because they don't have the votes.
Having checks and balances is a good defense against Authoritarianism. But when all three branches of government are full of Authoritarians, checks and balances mean nothing.

NerdyPotato ·

This is why it was designed to have checks and balances in the form of three branches of government. Going back to the original plan would solve most of the current issues.

sstronaut

@NerdyPotato True, but Congress have become cuckolds and they're refusing to listen to the judges

sstronaut

Yes, one person, should not have all that power, especially if they're going to abuse it as we have seen lately.

Rolexeo · 26-30, M

Democracy is inherently collectivist, I say get rid of it :)

Add a comment...