NYT: "Cancel the Midterms". Do you agree?

[branford]

28. Gridlock and very slow change were considered a feature, not a bug, in our system.

Our system, with its innumerable and frustrating checks and balances, was actually designed to prevent a tyranny of the majority or allow drastic changes with simple shifting political whims.

As you note, I also doubt many here would support a parliamentary system with Republicans at the helm. In fact, considering the Republicans are already in clear control of the House, under a parliamentary system, they would likely now be calling the shots, rather than President Obama. The thought of Prime Minister John Boehner is most unsettling.

Moreover, our federalist system, with significant power delegated to the states, both on a local level and in Congress (i.e., the Senate), was a necessary compromise in actually forming our union. Opening-up changes to the foundations of our government would require a Constitutional Convention, and given that conservatives comprise about half the country, many here would definitely not like certain other potential changes that would arise, to the extent anything could even attain the necessary super-majority approvals.