She advocates for deliberative democracy, so like congress but a randomly selected citizens council/jury that holds power and deliberate and talk about how to solve problems. While I’m not sure if her book said, I get the impression she wouldn’t approve of the amount of power presidents wield. She’d probably advocate that position be more subordinate to a people’s congress, like congress appointing a head of a department rather than the president being some grand leader. At least that’s my impression.
That’s actually the original intent of the presidency, from what I recall reading: they should be a relatively normal guy who keeps Congress in check, little more. Oh, well.
Does that mean that she thinks anyone who qualifies to be a candidate is automatically qualified to win?
She advocates for deliberative democracy, so like congress but a randomly selected citizens council/jury that holds power and deliberate and talk about how to solve problems. While I’m not sure if her book said, I get the impression she wouldn’t approve of the amount of power presidents wield. She’d probably advocate that position be more subordinate to a people’s congress, like congress appointing a head of a department rather than the president being some grand leader. At least that’s my impression.
That’s actually the original intent of the presidency, from what I recall reading: they should be a relatively normal guy who keeps Congress in check, little more. Oh, well.
I mean it’s probably leagues better than the current system where the only people who get anywhere near the presidency are the powergrubbers.
– Frost