3 ms·

Well, you don't elect the PM in parliamentary democracies either. That said, the electoral college is largely a formality. Much more important than the fairly

Well, you don't elect the PM in parliamentary democracies either. That said, the electoral college is largely a formality. Much more important than the fairly remote chance an elector might vote against the will of his state is the fact that most states have winner-take-all systems, wherein you get all of the state's electors by winning a majority. Even that has only proved problematic thrice: once in 2000, once in 1888, and once in 1876. And I think there are reasonable arguments in its defense: you force candidates to have some geographical distribution of support, for example. If it was based on solely on the popular vote, you could win the election with massive majorities in a few populous states and no support elsewhere. It's also balanced out, I think, by the fact the Presidency is, relatively speaking, not all that powerful of an office in America anyway - his most important power is "figurehead/scapegoat in a bully pulpit." Other than that he gets a veto over legislation (which Congress can override), command of the military (which is funded by Congress), and gets to appoint some top level executive offices and the judiciary - subject to Senate approval. Hypothetically Congress can also remove him from office via impeachment.

pbhjpbhj 10y ago
>the fact the Presidency is, relatively speaking, not all that powerful of an office [...] command of the military (which is funded by Congress), [...] // So command of the most powerful military complex in the World. Who in your opinion is powerful then? ;o)
- Amezarak 10y ago
  Being commander-in-chief is very different from being a kind of dictator of the military complex and is strictly circumscribed by law and custom. For example, all commissioned officers are approved by the Senate, and the Posse Comitatus Act prevents the President from using the military to enforce domestic policy. Congress also has the sole authority of appropriating money to the military and they can attach whatever strings they want. There is probably not single individual more powerful than the President, but Congress as a whole is by far the most powerful branch of government. The Presidency doesn't even compare. That said, I think what we've seen over the past several years, and will continue to see, is that dysfunctional Congresses increase the power of the Presidency.

pbhjpbhj 10y ago

>the fact the Presidency is, relatively speaking, not all that powerful of an office [...] command of the military (which is funded by Congress), [...] // So command of the most powerful military complex in the World. Who in your opinion is powerful then? ;o)

Amezarak 10y ago
Being commander-in-chief is very different from being a kind of dictator of the military complex and is strictly circumscribed by law and custom. For example, all commissioned officers are approved by the Senate, and the Posse Comitatus Act prevents the President from using the military to enforce domestic policy. Congress also has the sole authority of appropriating money to the military and they can attach whatever strings they want. There is probably not single individual more powerful than the President, but Congress as a whole is by far the most powerful branch of government. The Presidency doesn't even compare. That said, I think what we've seen over the past several years, and will continue to see, is that dysfunctional Congresses increase the power of the Presidency.