• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Does the Office of President have too much power?

Does the Office of President have too much power?

  • Total voters
    29
The office isn't given too much power. The one's in office may misinterpret their boundaries differently.
 
If your answer was/is some variant of "It depends on who's in office", then your answer is "Yes, the office has too much power".

The ability to go 'too far' is only possible if the office allows such reach. The fact that some choose to be more restrained doesn't change that.
 
radcen said:
Does the Office of President have too much power?

Note the question says the Office of President. Not any particular individual.
Click to expand...

THats a complex question. Constitutionally, no, it doesnt. However, congress has given the President a lot of power by passing many laws and creating many programs, and allocating many dollars which the President has the power to execute. Theyve created a permanent military which the President has a lot of latitude in commanding.

Politically, the President can take many actions without any agreement by congress. Congress, because of the two party system, has many checks in order to use their power to stop a President.
 
God no, Obama's presidency is proof of that.

I remember some clown calling Obama an autocrat. If Obama's an autocrat, he's terrible at it. :lamo

Anyway, like someone said, many people's answers depend on who's in office.
 
Van Basten said:
God no, Obama's presidency is proof of that.

I remember some clown calling Obama an autocrat. If Obama's an autocrat, he's terrible at it. :lamo

Anyway, like someone said, many people's answers depend on who's in office.
Click to expand...

Obamas ability to take action against the will of congress is PROOF that the Presidency has too much power.
 
radcen said:
Is that even realistically possible? Define 'pork'.
Click to expand...

Appropriation of government spending for localized projects primarily for the purpose of bringing money to a representative's district. I don't think it would be that difficult to create a set of requirements for a bill or amendment to fit the category of pork.
 
if its not your party yes if it is your party no....lol
 
I voted Other. I dunno, really. POTUS is #1 Person in America. Being #1 comes with its perks. Kind of like the eldest sibling dictating his or her will upon the younger ones. Yeah, it sucks, but why would #1 not use their disadvantages against them -- they're #1, they can do whatever the **** they want to do. POTUS will keep being #1 and acting like The Prince as long as he damn pleases...or until Congress kicks him out. 'Cause any legislation trying to be passed to restrict the power of the POTUS, it will be vetoed. And if they battle over that, the POTUS will be impeached. Every POTUS should have been impeached for one terrible ****ing decision or action or whatever. This is a battle reserved for the Congress and the POTUS, one which is fought with a mutually understanding of the implications for the future. It'd take a large scale social movement to truly balance the power imbalances, but it could also just entrench them even further.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom