I hope people realize this. The president is almost treated like a king. When things are good or bad, he gets the credit or the criticism. Our president was not meant to have this kind of power with the American people. Any comments?

I honestly think that the whole system is broken....Wasn't it supposed to be 'Of the people, By the people, For the people'..???? There are far too many priviliged, spoiled rotten rich-kids and millionaires in congress for that to be true anymore....

Throw 'em ALL out and start again!!!!

This is so true. Congress has abdicated much, though not all, of its powers over the years. The end result is that Presidential elections are now that much more important.

[quote="truebrit";p="730"]
I honestly think that the whole system is broken

I wouldnt go that far, i think the system still works sometimes, and we just dont realize it. Another point to realize is that we live in a republic, not a democracy as some would like to say.
i really think george washington and the founders of this great country would be unhappy with how this country has turned into.

__________________
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

__________________
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

youre welcome senax. it seems you and i agree with the problems in america these days, we just have different opinions and philosophies on how to fix them.

didn't trust the great unwashed masses with something as powerful as an actual DIRECT method to change the way they were governed...

Whilst it is apparent to all those but the most politically-blinkered partisans that there was something SERIOUSLY wrong with the whole Florida fiasco in '00, I still find it somewhat ironic that in the run-up to the election the Gore crowd were pre-spinning the fact that they thought they could lose the popular vote but win the electoral college, and the bushistas were positioning themselves in the exact opposite...to the total surprise of everyone, bush lost the popular vote which almost no-one predicted would happen... which of course set-up the whole "legitimacy" argument for the next four years..

I'd argue, of course, that bush was illegitimate, and would offer that his every action has proven that to be the case, seeing as how he is being such a bastard to everyone but his powerful (and rich) donors.... [For the humour impaired that last statement was sarcasm]

Back on topic, I would also suggest that the residency is EXACTLY what the framers had in mind....The constitution was written, by, for and of, rich, white, male, land-owners.....Seems to me that pretty much nothing has changed...

__________________
The last time this country mixed politics with religion, people got burned at the stake.

The electoral college issue at the time of the framing of the Constitution, (and its ratification process) was a deal breaker. Some colonies threatened to boycott unless electors were included in part of the Constitution's election provisions. So it was made a part of our national election process in order to hasten the ratification of the Constitution.

There are various reasons why the "would-be boycotters" wanted it. One of which is that if it were a direct referrendum, then the large cities (Boston, New York, Philadelphia, ect...) would be able to vote their candidates into the presidency much easier than say a country bumpkin or, yes, a rich land owner. Those living out in the wilderness fringe didn't like the fact that while they were feeding the nation and sending goods to the markets in the big cities making everyone prosperous...they wouldn't be allowed the opportunity of fair representation.

In many ways, that's still true today. The electoral process evens things out. It has served us for these many years and will continue to do so. This is one of various examples where the incredible forethought our founding fathers is inherently more valuable to this nation today than some present day politicians.

__________________
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

Uh, i dont know what you said Senax, but hopefully this will help. You may be correct in the part about the representation thing. But maybe i can offer some insight.
When the framers were deciding how to elect public officials, they offered many views. If you read, i think either Federalist #12 or Federalist #51 by James Madison, it states that there is a reason for electing public officials differently. The house of Reps. was supposed to be the "nit and gritty" part of federal govt, elected by the people to represent their views and opinions. The Senate, considered to be more "aristocratic", was originally elected by the House of Reps, i believe. And the President was to be elected by the electoral college, which still stands today. Uh, the whole point of that was to have different parts of govt elected by different people in order to prevent the majority to have their "agenda" pushed through govt more easily. Maybe that was what Senax was talking about when he talked about the farmers and such getting represented so that they have a voice in govt. Truebrit seems to want to spin some conspiracy that white male property owners were the only ones allowed to be represented. That may be true for that time, but our society has changed and PROGRESSED to include everyone in the voting process so that all the voices are heard in the voting process.