1. Standard membervivify
    rain
    Joined
    08 Mar '11
    Moves
    12351
    28 Mar '23 23:01
    Which is a better option?
  2. Subscribershavixmir
    Guppy poo
    Sewers of Holland
    Joined
    31 Jan '04
    Moves
    87803
    29 Mar '23 04:04
    @vivify said
    Which is a better option?
    It depends the role you give a president.
  3. SubscriberWajoma
    Die Cheeseburger
    Provocation
    Joined
    01 Sep '04
    Moves
    77864
    29 Mar '23 08:54
    @shavixmir said
    It depends the role you give a president.
    "...men cannot be enslaved politically until they have been disarmed ideologically. When they are so disarmed, it is the victims who take the lead in the process of their own destruction"

    AR
  4. Subscribermoonbus
    Über-Nerd
    Joined
    31 May '12
    Moves
    8210
    29 Mar '23 09:25
    @vivify said
    Which is a better option?
    President for life is invariably the worse option.

    American presidents do not necessarily command a majority in Congress, and this sometimes leads to a stymied or obstructionist political process. Whereas a British PM necessarily commands a majority in Parliament; this facilitates the legislative process, but has a downside as well in that the ruling party sees no need to reach consensus on policy.

    Personally, I prefer the Swiss model: no party can control parliament (this is constitutionally anchored), thereby forcing consensus politics. Furthermore, the executive is a committee of seven people, and no party can control this committee either--this too is constitutionally anchored, the members of the executive committee must be chosen from a multitude of parties.
  5. Standard membervivify
    rain
    Joined
    08 Mar '11
    Moves
    12351
    29 Mar '23 11:57
    @shavixmir said
    It depends the role you give a president.
    Assuming it's not a mostly ceremonious role.
  6. Standard membervivify
    rain
    Joined
    08 Mar '11
    Moves
    12351
    29 Mar '23 12:09
    @moonbus said
    President for life is invariably the worse option.

    American presidents do not necessarily command a majority in Congress, and this sometimes leads to a stymied or obstructionist political process. Whereas a British PM necessarily commands a majority in Parliament; this facilitates the legislative process, but has a downside as well in that the ruling party sees no need to ...[text shortened]... ionally anchored, the members of the executive committee must be chosen from a multitude of parties.
    I would like to see a combination in the electoral process where both a parliament/ congress and the president are elected. I see no reason why this can't be the case with PMs.

    In the U.S. the political party of the President usually switches when they leave office since the opposition can exploit a dissatisfaction with the incumbent. This means continual screw ups like from Boris and Liz Truss would doom their party to losing power when a new leader is elected.

    As far as "president for life" I'm a strong supporter of term limits.
  7. Subscribermoonbus
    Über-Nerd
    Joined
    31 May '12
    Moves
    8210
    29 Mar '23 12:18
    @vivify said
    Assuming it's not a mostly ceremonious role.
    As in Germany, for example. It’s the chancellor who has the power.
  8. Subscribermoonbus
    Über-Nerd
    Joined
    31 May '12
    Moves
    8210
    29 Mar '23 12:20
    @vivify said
    I would like to see a combination in the electoral process where both a parliament/ congress and the president are elected. I see no reason why this can't be the case with PMs.

    In the U.S. the political party of the President usually switches when they leave office since the opposition can exploit a dissatisfaction with the incumbent. This means continual screw ups like ...[text shortened]... en a new leader is elected.

    As far as "president for life" I'm a strong supporter of term limits.
    Presidents for life are invariably just dictators with a euphemistic title. Putin obviously has no intention of leaving office voluntarily, and Xi is well on the way there too.
  9. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    36617
    29 Mar '23 13:37
    @wajoma said
    "...men cannot be enslaved politically until they have been disarmed ideologically. When they are so disarmed, it is the victims who take the lead in the process of their own destruction"

    AR
    From Wajoma's Big Fat Book of Excuses.
  10. Joined
    20 May '16
    Moves
    36098
    29 Mar '23 13:40
    @suzianne said
    From Wajoma's Big Fat Book of Excuses.
    From Suzanne’s big fat azz.
  11. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    36617
    29 Mar '23 14:42
    @mike69 said
    From Suzanne’s big fat azz.
    At least spell my name right, troll.
  12. Standard memberAThousandYoung
    or different places
    tinyurl.com/2tp8tyx8
    Joined
    23 Aug '04
    Moves
    26660
    29 Mar '23 20:40
    @mike69 said
    From Suzanne’s big fat azz.
    You spend a lot of time fantasizing about other posters' nether parts don't you
  13. Subscribershavixmir
    Guppy poo
    Sewers of Holland
    Joined
    31 Jan '04
    Moves
    87803
    30 Mar '23 04:22
    @vivify said
    Assuming it's not a mostly ceremonious role.
    Then a prime minister.

    I should give a longer answer….
  14. Joined
    20 May '16
    Moves
    36098
    30 Mar '23 05:14
    @suzianne said
    At least spell my name right, troll.
    😉, surly you jest. I simply make statements to try and understand and all I get I return is everything I already know? Have a good one you little wokester you.
  15. Joined
    20 May '16
    Moves
    36098
    30 Mar '23 05:16
    @athousandyoung said
    You spend a lot of time fantasizing about other posters' nether parts don't you
    Do you have a crush on me or something?🤭🤢🤮
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree