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?

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

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.