From time to time, and I believe it is on a weekly or monthly schedule, the head of the government, the prime minister, must enter the house of commons to answer questions. These sessions can get quite spirited and entertaining, and more than one government has been brought to its knees over a particular question. Wouldn't you like to see the president having to answer questions in the house or the senate or better yet the whole congress in joint session?
I'd rather have the ones like they have in the Middle East where they get in huge fights and the ultimate insult is to throw your shoe at someone...
Nah, our legislature is way too big for that, and we're not as bawdy and fun as those guys. It's a Brit parliamentary thing, which they do very well. Won't work here, methinks, or if they did, it wouldn't be anywhere near as entertaining.
The American Presidency is a more powerful position than the British Prime Minister. The fact that they have to answer to Parliament (literally) shows they are more subservient to Parliament. This type of practice might not be as appropriate for the US President. There could also be additional security issues with the President having to repeatedly show up. The US has a federal system (with independent state governments) which is probably another reason the President is not held as directly accountable. In the old days it was these state governments that selected the country's president through the Electoral College system. I am just pointing out that there are some historical reasons for the differences, and a few practical ones that still exist today.
I do not believe that I would care for this to happen in the US. I think it would easily turn into a "let me throw a sucker punch" kind of deal or it would be so prepared that we wouldn't get any straight answers anyway. I'd be tickled pink if opposing parties just stop acting like children.
The media is supposed to be the ones asking tough questions. Nowadays they’re just the propaganda arm of the president, and those that aren’t...are banned from the room. so yes, the president taking questions from the opposing party directly would be nice
I have also seen, & been impressed, by this U.K. tradition. Unfortunately, I don't think it would play out the same, over here. For one thing, American politicians don't generally have the debating chops to emulate the English. Ours are certainly less well-mannered, as well, less polite. I believe @MJ Davies called it correctly: we might have Senators asking the President for his opinion on the Dr. Seuss scandal. I doubt it would be nearly as informative as the British version; our politicians tend to do more side-stepping of questions, and are often allowed to get away with it. It might end up being largely just talking points. @Patricio Da Silva also made a good point about the unwieldy size of our Congress, for this type of exercise; though a potential remedy might be to design a system in which a smaller group of congressmen is chosen, or is assigned, on a rotating basis. Our President's role, however, has evolved to appear less subservient to the Congress. And, in truth, the U.S. population-- at present, anyway-- would probably not appreciate this sort of wonky discussion, in part because of our high degree of partisanship, which causes a great number of Americans to be deaf to any arguments from the other side.
