T Nation

2 Presidents at Once?

lets ay we could elect 2 presidents at once.Maybe one is a Republican and the other a Democrat.Lets say they didnt argue or need to debate one another because they understood each others strengths and knew it would benefit the country.Now I know we live in a country that would never vote for this or even consider it but lets say we did.

What do you think the pro’s and con’s of this would be.

One of the presidents might have better ideas on National security and war while the other would be better at dealing with money issues jobs and the health care system.It never seems like we ever have a President who is good at all the things we need covered, so why not have 2.

Or we just follow the constitution and stop trying to be a welfare/warfare state.

I’d rather have “two chicks at the same time”.

How about the president shouldn’t be the most important man in the world and the government should leave me the fuck alone.

I like all of the reply’s, especially your’s Pat.

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
How about the president shouldn’t be the most important man in the world and the government should leave me the fuck alone.[/quote]

I have a feeling that’s what most will be saying with their vote in the mid-term elections.

Well, a good Chief Executive in fact has the management of the various departments of the government done by highly competent Cabinet members who are the respective Secretaries of those departments. He chooses overall direction and deals with a few select issues, and everyone reports to him, but he does not micromanage the projects in general of these departments.

Then you have your sort of President who appoints Mao-idolists with zero private sector experience, and no experience running goverment operations either usually, while he himself also has no experience running anything. And scarcely bothers with Cabinet meetings, having virtually none of them, with an organization plan (if any) probably best described as “cluster****.”

How this relates to your original post is that in a properly run organization, rather than “just” two Presidents, in a sense you have a quite large number, each in charge only of their respective departments of the Executive branch.

Rather like a corporation which may have many divisions and a President (he may be named Vice-President but this is just nomenclature) of each division, though one President overall of the company to whom the others are responsible.

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Well, a good Chief Executive in fact has the management of the various departments of the government done by highly competent Cabinet members who are the respective Secretaries of those departments. He chooses overall direction and deals with a few select issues, and everyone reports to him, but he does not micromanage the projects in general of these departments.

Then you have your sort of President who appoints Mao-idolists with zero private sector experience, and no experience running goverment operations either usually, while he himself also has no experience running anything. And scarcely bothers with Cabinet meetings, having virtually none of them, with an organization plan (if any) probably best described as “cluster****.”

How this relates to your original post is that in a properly run organization, rather than “just” two Presidents, in a sense you have a quite large number, each in charge only of their respective departments of the Executive branch.

Rather like a corporation which may have many divisions and a President (he may be named Vice-President but this is just nomenclature) of each division, though one President overall of the company to whom the others are responsible.[/quote]

Nice, so in a perfect world (obviously not ours) two presidents wouldnt be needed because the system would work like it should.Like the way you stated.

I think you should stop pretending that you are not the secon coming of the Roman Empire and build a triumvirate and let them kill each other off until there is an imperator.

I’d suggest handing them those Vulcan weapons with a blade on one end, ringing that big gong, and cuing the Star Trek fight music.

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
I’d suggest handing them those Vulcan weapons with a blade on one end, ringing that big gong, and cuing the Star Trek fight music.[/quote]

Jesse Ventura for president!

Works for me.

[quote]horsepuss wrote:

What do you think the pro’s and con’s of this would be.

[/quote]

The obvious “con” would be an extra idiot in office who thinks he knows what is best for me.

Naturally, there would be no “pro’s” to this situation.

Or that room in The Running Man with the spikes in the wall would do. Code of the Gladiator! No pain, no gain!

Once in the 1960s the Chicago Cubs decided that instead of hiring one manager to head the team they should hire a multitude of managers. Afterall, two heads are better than one. The result: the Cubs finished last pretty much every year. Finally, they gave it up and went with one manager. The result: they moved up to next to last. The moral of the story is, it doesn’t matter how many idiots you have running the program when the system is screwed up it still doesn’t work.

this would be irrelevant… impossible… and slightly retarded. This isn’t Sparta. This is AMURICA!