• SabinStargem@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I do not believe so. As I said, “Figurehead President”. The way I figure, if the four regional presidents are in a deadlock about something, the Figurehead Pres can cast a tie-breaking vote. Seeing as that figurehead is elected by the four regional presidents, the figurehead should be relatively neutral. Impeachment of a bad Figurehead can be done through either popular vote of the entire nation, or three of the four regional presidents agreeing to remove the Figurehead.

    IMO, the purpose of a Figurehead President is to give the appearance of a unified mission to people.

    • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Oh just as a tiebreaker. Interesting.

      Personally I don’t support any electoral system where leaders have any more or less support than the votes they receive, so I’m not sure how that would be workable in your system. For example, the outlying group would have way more electoral power per person if each leader gets one vote.

      • SabinStargem@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        The vote is for cooperation between executive branches, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that the Regional Houses, Courts, or the National Senate would agree to cooperate with executives. In any case, there is a 4th President - the Outer Region, which consists of Alaska, Guam, Hawaii, Djibuti, and other small yet significant territories. I am of the mind that with a lack of raw land and people, the Outer Regions should get some sort of outsized advantage to compensate. A president’s vote being equal to their peers is probably simple enough to do the trick.