Would it be wise to have both a republican and a democrat occupy the oval office

1. 89

   alifeofdesignposted 11 years ago

   Would it be wise to have both a republican and a democrat occupy the oval office?
   
   With the up-and-coming presidential election and both side expressing their willingness to be bipartisan, would it be best for these United States to come together in a more literally sense and work hand-in-hand?
   
   

   replyreport
2. 60

   tammybarnetteposted 11 years ago

   Very good point, I have often thought that if you have a D president then he should have a R vice and vice versa.....And there should be an even number of seats alotted in both house and senate so there isn't a majority party...however...the polarization I see right now is unprecedented. One must wonder, even under a strictly bipartisan layout such as I suggested, would they compromise? Probably not (sigh).

   replyreport
3. 0

   Justsilvieposted 11 years ago

   I thought we had a coaliton government with the House and Senate but their behavior in the last 2 years shows that they have no desire to work together. Promises of being bipartisan are probable empty rhetoric to get elected. We need to also realize, there are more than two parties and listen to what the others might  have to say...the other two have gotten two comfortable with their positions.

   replyreport
4. 60

   IDONOposted 11 years ago

   You'd have to rename the "White House". To like, "Jersey Shore" or "Archie and Edith's House".  And can you imagine the debate over who gets the intern?
        You know, if something happened to Obama, (pray not) we would have a Democratic president and Republican vice-president. That's as close as it will ever get.
        Hand-in-hand would be great, but impossible since the party's agendas are so far apart. It was created as a checks and balances system, but has since changed dramatically. I'm not sure what it is now. Nor do most Americans.
        This wouldn't be like the old show "The Odd Couple", where they were so different that it worked. There would be far too much interference and pressure from their respective parties for them to co-habitate.

   replyreport
5. 73

   d.williamposted 11 years ago

   Great question, but not very likely.
   The position of president should be one that has the best interest of ALL people foremost in their agendas. 
   I don't know what this country has deteriorated into, but there seems to be only two entities fighting for control:  The wealthy and powerful corporate america versus everyone else.   It is a battle within our government that trumps common sense and the good of the people;  and should not be tolerated.  Any president that promotes anything other than the interest of the common people should be kicked out of office.

   replyreport
6. 81

   Attikosposted 11 years ago

   Single party rule, which is the concept here, has been tried in many places. Recent examples include the USSR and the PRC. It hasn't worked out well.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      tammybarnetteposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      WOW attikos, good point! What if this whole polarization has been a way to have Americans agree to such an idea which on the surface appears like an example of compromise, but truly leads to a one ruling party...thought provoking!

      replyreport
7. 53

   whonunuwhoposted 11 years ago

   No, because one will always look up, while the other will always look down and never shall their eyes meet. Seriously, there are way too many differences, politically speaking, that would prevent this from being a wise move by any office holder. It does seem an awful shame, doesn't it?

   replyreport
8. 67

   Admiral Murrahposted 11 years ago

   Great question. When the founding fathers set up the republic, the person winning the largest number of votes was president and the one with the next highest votes served as vice-president. The political party system quickly jumped in rather than allow that tradition to continue. The original system with its checks and balances was a good system. Sadly, many groups have worked diligently to undo the republic and its original systems, including the election of President, Vice President and Senators. When people did not understand the wisdom behind the systems, they just changed them without considering the ramifications.

   replyreport
9. 77

   Kathleen Cochranposted 11 years ago

   In the early days of the republic the top vote getter from either party was president and the second place vote getter was VP.  Can you imagine Obama as president and McCain as VP?  Actually, those two might have actually worked together.  Bush and Gore?  Not so much, though, actually, under this system it would have been Gore then Bush.    No.  That wouldn't work either.

   replyreport
10. 72

    lone77starposted 11 years ago

    Demopublicans and Republicrats have already come together. Didn't you get the memo?
    
    The apparent differences are only the Corporate Party ploy to keep alive the illusion of choice.
    
    Both parties have destroyed voting and Roberts Rules of Order at their conventions. Here's proof:
    
    RNC Scripted:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKaXqoC4DjE
    
    DNC Scripted:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmaE2Aez_XY
    
    Both parties are pushing the Corporate Party agenda of,
    * More war,
    * More economic insanity (which will destroy America - $16.3T and accelerating!)
    * More tyranny (unPatriot, TSA, NDAA, CISPA, SOPA, PIPA, TPP, Obama's "Kill List")
    
    Why would they destroys America like this? Because America used to be the only real threat to their drive for a one-world government of the plutocratic oligarchy of Power Elite ruling slaves with Orwellian techniques of electronics and chemical control. Get your RFID microchip embedded today. Be cool, like James Bond in the latest 007 thriller. Just think of the convenience, the medical security, the loving care of the Nanny State telling you what to do at every step.
    
    Hitler and Stalin were merely dress rehearsals. This is the real thing. And the illusion of Normalcy and Choice is still very much alive. Sieg heil!
    
    Now, if you want real choice, watch the unscripted presidential debates later today (October 23, 2012), online.

    replyreport
11. 53

    amitfalconposted 11 years ago

    Oh nice i like the thought good
    http://www.naturovillespa.com

    replyreport
12. 0

    ahorsebackposted 11 years ago

    What would be wise would be to eliminate the two partys ,or we  could make them illegal in fact .....that would make people vote for the person !   our system now is morphed into   being so  divisive that all one has to do to hold office is to divide people and keep them that way ! Who wins then ? Only the officeholder ! Only the stalled government , the lazyness of congress and senate , and the inaction of a system that completely fails to work .     AND the American people chose not to see beyond this divisiveness  and why , apathy and lazyness !

    replyreport
    1. 81

       Attikosposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       It wouldn't work. Jefferson invented the political party as a means of competing with the Federalist establishment of the day. They form naturally even where outlawed. Doing that would in effect give rule to a single one, a worse scenario.

       replyreport
13. 60

    ReneeDC1979posted 11 years ago

    I think if you had both parties in the oval office, there would still be a divide and nothing would get accomplished - good, bad or indifferent.  Unfortunately, our diverse beliefs, ideas, thoughts, goals hinder the country from moving together as a whole.  I mean  if we could all get along and simply do what's "right" then there would be no need for law.  Everyone would say "Hello, how ya doing?"  We would treat each other as we want to be treated.  Great question though!!

    replyreport
14. 64

    yoginijoyposted 11 years ago

    I was wondering the same thing. Could it actually happen? I also would like to see more political parties represented by the media. Did you know there are two women running for President/Vice President in the Green Party?  We don't hear about other folks since the Republicans and Democrats get all the spotlight.

    replyreport
15. 53

    Bunixposted 11 years ago

    It depends upon the people who role the country..

    replyreport