Can the United States not be governed without a president?

[Anonymous]

[RavVid]

The Westminster system has the executive within parliament - hence Prime Misters. In your case it could be within Congress.

Your Founding Fathers were very much aware of that but at that time Cromwell was still within living memory. So they wanted to avoid a strong man taking over as Cromwell did.

You need a mechanism of transferring power from one executive to the next since Prime Ministers rise and fall. You just can't have fixed terms with elections on one set date and the transfer of power on another set date.

The easiest way to do this is to have a King to issue writs for elections and issue warrants to the Prime Minister and other Ministers.

Charles III might be willing to help you out and be your King.

[strateguy632]

but British is bad because the same "manager" is the same one making laws for his agenda, instead of general laws. we are the only real republic not briton nor israel etc.

[Chazmatazz269]

It could be. It should be. It kind of is a government of committee, but there’s definitely room for improvement in that regard.
A good start would be ending VP campaigns. The candidate with the most votes gets the presidency. The runner up gets the vice presidency.
We the people have to force the two major parties to work together if we’re never going to elect an alternative party.

[OlderAndWiser]

Have you ever studied the history of presidential elections?

[strateguy632]

so imagine roosevelt-d wins election 1944, so republican VP rules senate with republican policy?
fdr died so the republican takes over? that would have prevented a stain on america history but is this what you @chazmatazz269
wanted?

[OlderAndWiser]

@strateguy632 And how did that work for John Adams having Thomas Jefferson as his VP?

[strateguy632]

correct. the United States must be governed by a president. the manager and elected army boss. the idea of separation of powers is unique and American exceptionalism.

[Anonymous]

well, how do you define "governed"? what do you mean by the term? I mean, we need a foreign policy, right? And someone must make those important decisions. But is that part of being "governed" for you?

Let me know ask you this: Can Britain not be governed without a prime minister? Can the Roman Empire not be governed without an emperor? Could the Soviet Union not be governed without a General Secretary? I think the answer is the same for all of them.

[exitseven]

We have 3 seats of power. Each has a function. The President is the Chief Executive 'officer. Those functions must be given to some other entity,

[Asker]

Can the office of president be abolished?

[strateguy632]

no because of constitution document that set the shape of the government.

[Micheal6918]

It can't because every country needs a president