(December 21, 2011 at 9:41 am)whateverist Wrote: A parliamentary system might help.
America couldn't handle a system as potentially volatile as a parliamentary system. Given our bi-polar political mood swings, we'd put the Italians to shame for the record number of different administrations we could have in a decade.
It seems every two years America swings the opposite direction. Reagan was elected in 80 by a landslide. Then two years later, Democrats sweep Congress. Then two years later, Reagan wins by a record landslide. Then two years later, Democrats take the Senate and House. Then two years later, Reagan's VP H W Bush wins the election. I don't remember the election results in the mid term but he lost to Clinton in 92. Then the Democrats lose congress in 94. Then Clinton is re-elected by a landslide in 96.
As far as I can remember, the only time a sitting president did OK in the mid-term was W Bush in 2002, who benefited politically from the then recent 9/11 attack. Every two years, we "vote to throw the bums out", putting in the people that we threw out two years prior.
Our three-branch system of government, even if it has its flaws, is designed to put the breaks on any changes, so that change happens over a period of time instead of all at once.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist