What if we elected our presidents like this (see details)?

I’ll throw in that places like Mexico only gave one term, but the term is 6 years. Something to consider while you are considering.

I don’t think it’s a good idea to switch back and fourth every 4 years, because it will be too disruptive. Policies constantly under threat of being overturned before given a chance.

Plus, if there is ever any hope of a third party winning where would that fit in?

How would this work in terms of Congress?

My experience with changing parties has been that you end up with (or perhaps it just continues from what you have) short-term policy. One party comes in and they get rid of policy the previous party implemented and replace it with their version of a response. Then the next party comes in and ditches the former government’s policy and replaces it with their preferred version. And so on and on and on.

My worry would be that you would end up with a situation where good policy goes by the wayside and problems are never resolved. I’m sure this happens now, but there is no bipartisan commitment to solving problems. Every four years a new (or a revamped) approach is implemented. Nothing gets any better.

Perhaps if there is no competition this might not happen, but I don’t have a lot of faith in politicians to just get on with governing regardless of whose policy is in place. I’m cynical about why people become politicians these days. Many seem hell bent on lining their own pockets and being career politicians rather than governing.

Who defines who is liberal and who is conservative? There is quite a bit of the left that thinks both Obama and Mrs Clintpn are too conservative. And many on the Republican side of the best have criticized Trump as not being a true conservative.

The idea that there are two equal sides to everything is wrong on the face of it, and that idea has been the source of a lot of our trouble in the past twenty years.

When cable news channels with 24 hours to fill arose, the norm became “Some say the Earth is round, opinions differ, we’ll discuss the controversy.”

Republicans learned that they could manipulate the conventional wisdom because no matter how awful their opinions, cable news would give them air time and treat them as honest players with good intent.

So they’ve pushed the center further and further right and now we have President Grab Her By the Pussy getting elected by promising torture, mocking the disabled, and abusing the families of fallen soldiers.

I’d settle for ranked-choice voting.

I’d rather have two presidents. One from each party. Each time.
Maybe three, so there would be a way for not only one way of thinking to rule .

Yeah. Three presidents. One right, one left, one third party.

Congress could still check and balance them.

3 presidents, no vice presidents.
Congress stays the same, but with term limits.

I agree ranked choicenis better.

Ranked choice voting sounds great, until you actually deal with it. You end up in a situation with people actively courting everyone’s second place, but not advocating for their primary interests. It was a disaster in Oakland which ended up with a mayor most people really didn’t want.

And, it doesn’t work in a Presidential race which is essentially a binary option. All those Gary Johnson voters would have chosen Trump as their second choice anyway.

@MrGrimm888 The Romans did that, the Triumvirate. Worked well until two got jealous of the third.

That’s not far from what happens already only it’s every 8 years (usually). I can’t understand why we would want to force a change if it’s not wanted. The electorate usually decides a change at the end of 8 years with a few exceptions like Carter and Bush 1. You also have the problem of who decides who is conservative or liberal. The net result would be everyone runs as a Republican one year and everyone runs as a Democrat the next. The voters could choose anyone they want which is what we have regardless of credentials.