Why is/isn't the US to vast to maintain an archaic position of 'president'?

5 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    6 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    It is too vast to be micromanaged by this bunch of left wing extremists.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 6 years ago

    The danger of a president is in the power of the executive to consolidate more power and potentially become a dictator. Aside from a purely anarchistic society which spans the globe, a country needs an acting executive if for no other reason, to administrate and entertain foreign dignitaries. Our country is barely more than 200 years old. Why would you call the position of a dedicated president archaic?

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    6 years ago

    What form of government are you espousing...States Rights over Federalist, Anarchy, Libertarian, Monarchy, Dictatorship, Theocracy, Plutocracy?

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    6 years ago

    If it is so archaic, why do most other supposedly free countries elect one?

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    6 years ago

    Let pure federalism sort it out.

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.