alternatehistory.com

I still think a watered down presidency in favour of a Westminster-style cabinet government assembled from Parliament is a better long term system than French/American republicanism as, historically, this model hasn't really been successful for pretty much anyone other than the US: presidential systems are prone to coups when there is political deadlock.

There seems to be a bit of truth in it. An unaccountable head of state is much more dangerous than a Prime Minister you can be removed by the parliament. So let's assume the Founding Fathers recognize this danger, but instead of introducing a Prime Minister or introducing the Impeachment, they decide to form a dual leadership on the Roman model.

Is this possible? And how could this be achieved?
Top