I have often thought it would be advantageous in any number of ways if the Presidency were divorced from partisan politics. What I mean by this is something analogous to the Israeli model, in which the President is above partisan politics and is not of any particular party.
Don't get me wrong: I'm not interested in Presidency being a figurehead position like Israel's is. I would like to see him retain all his current functions and responsibilities save head of party.
What do you think?
2007-04-17 08:32:37 · 9 answers · asked by Rick N 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Could it happen? I mean, by definition, you go to vote for the person who will best represent your positions. If my positions are best represented by one party verses another, I will most likely vote for the representative of the party.
Bush is a great example. People may think that the '06 election indicated that a whole bunch of people stopped being Republican and voted for Democrats. That analysis would be overly simplistic. Like his father, Bush has made the error of trying to concede across party lines on too many issues. He doesn't win any votes from people sworn to hate him, but he loses votes from his base.
His father raised taxes to appeal across party lines. People thought if you are going to get that, you might as well vote for Clinton.
I am sick of Bush. But, I will probably be more likely to vote Democratic is the GOP puts up a McCain (or at least throw my vote away on the Libertarian) than if they put up a Fred Thompson.
Nice idea, but just being practical and honest.
2007-04-17 09:04:46 · answer #1 · answered by Whootziedude 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The only way it would work is where the President served for an 8 or 10 year term, not having to worry about re-election would effectively remove most of the problems with partisan politics in the whitehouse.
If a president didn't have to apease the members of the party that elected him to insure their support in his re-election he/she could be the President of all the people.
2007-04-17 15:31:48 · answer #2 · answered by Ron M 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I like the idea and I think it is a big reason why Obama has become so popular so quick. He preaches non- partisan politics and has worked with Republicans on Immigration(McCain)and Nuclear proliferation legislation(Lugar)
2007-04-17 08:39:06 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Too many people vote on party lines without even knowing anything about the person they gave "support" to. Enough people listen to the 2 parties that smear propaganda from them usually negates any support for people in other parties or especially not in a party.
2007-04-17 08:40:01 · answer #4 · answered by Tim J 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well mayor, at least where I am, is a non partisan position but believe me, partisan politics is still very heavily involved.
I dont know that you can separate it.
2007-04-17 08:38:50 · answer #5 · answered by sociald 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would ...
have you ever noticed during the time of Congressional elections, the amount of time and money the President consumes campaigning for "his" party. that is wrong. he is supposed to be the President of all the people, not just his party.
2007-04-17 08:39:17 · answer #6 · answered by truth seeker 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
each and every time international locations dabble with standard well-being care drug fees pass up, rationing of care happens because of the fact of underestimated budgets, docs supply up training drugs because of the fact they might't stay afloat financially so finally fees upward push all around.
2016-12-29 04:51:51 · answer #7 · answered by scheidt 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Good luck trying to get partisanship out of politics.
2007-04-17 08:37:30 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
And non-gendered as well, to provide balance.
2007-04-17 08:37:57 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋