3 edited tags
| link
    Tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackPolitics/status/600975016453365760
2 grammar, wording, etc
source | link

Why is the Reolerole of the US president not more closely linked to the House of Representatives?

It seems strange to me that the U.S. IsUSA is currently in a state where it'sits leader can't actually get much done on his own.... He/she (henceforth he for ease of typing) isn't in control of either legislature, Thethe House of Representatives nor the Senate

In the UK and most other legalpolitical systems, the leader of the country (the actual leader, eg the prime minister, nor a figurehead likeexecutive not the Queenhead of state) is elected by way of a majority in the legislature, which in practice makes him as powerful as his majority. If he loses power in the commons (representatives) he loses power overall, and ana sustained imbalance is impossible. In the UK the upper house (Lords, roughly akin to the Senate) cannot stop a bill, only delay it. Therefore the UK is essentially a single tier legislature with safeguards.

Do Americans (or anyone else, for that matter) perceive anyWhat are the real benefit tobenefits of having a directly elected president, whichsuch that they outweigh the uncertainty and in-fighting of having a president with no control in either legislature?

Why is the Reole of the US president not more linked to the House of Representatives?

It seems strange to me that the U.S. Is currently in a state where it's leader can't actually get much done on his own.... He/she (henceforth he for ease of typing) isn't in control of either legislature, The House of Representatives nor the Senate

In the UK and most other legal systems, the leader of the country (the actual leader, eg the prime minister, nor a figurehead like the Queen) is elected by way of a majority in the legislature, which in practice makes him as powerful as his majority. If he loses power in the commons (representatives) he loses power overall, and an imbalance is impossible. In the UK the upper house (Lords, roughly akin to the Senate) cannot stop a bill, only delay it. Therefore the UK is essentially a single tier legislature with safeguards

Do Americans (or anyone else, for that matter) perceive any real benefit to having a directly elected president, which outweigh the uncertainty and in-fighting of having a president with no control in either legislature?

Why is the role of the US president not more closely linked to the House of Representatives?

It seems strange to me that the USA is currently in a state where its leader can't actually get much done on his own.... He isn't in control of either legislature, the House nor the Senate

In the UK and most other political systems, the leader of the country (the executive not the head of state) is elected by way of a majority in the legislature, which in practice makes him as powerful as his majority. If he loses power in the commons (representatives) he loses power overall, and a sustained imbalance is impossible. In the UK the upper house (Lords, roughly akin to the Senate) cannot stop a bill, only delay it. Therefore the UK is essentially a single tier legislature with safeguards.

What are the real benefits of having a directly elected president, such that they outweigh the uncertainty and in-fighting of having a president with no control in either legislature?

1
source | link

Why is the Reole of the US president not more linked to the House of Representatives?

It seems strange to me that the U.S. Is currently in a state where it's leader can't actually get much done on his own.... He/she (henceforth he for ease of typing) isn't in control of either legislature, The House of Representatives nor the Senate

In the UK and most other legal systems, the leader of the country (the actual leader, eg the prime minister, nor a figurehead like the Queen) is elected by way of a majority in the legislature, which in practice makes him as powerful as his majority. If he loses power in the commons (representatives) he loses power overall, and an imbalance is impossible. In the UK the upper house (Lords, roughly akin to the Senate) cannot stop a bill, only delay it. Therefore the UK is essentially a single tier legislature with safeguards

Do Americans (or anyone else, for that matter) perceive any real benefit to having a directly elected president, which outweigh the uncertainty and in-fighting of having a president with no control in either legislature?