There is a trade off between preference integration and Political coherence.
In a Presindentialist system you give large powers to a single person, so you have coherent and decisive policy, at the cost of disenfranchiment of half of the people, polarization and the danger of turning presidentialism into dictatorship.
Presidentialism is mini autocracy, and it has some of its advantages, as described by Hobbes. For me the advantages are modest, the Risk enormous.
The problem is you don't get integration and political coherence, quite the opposite. The separation of powers make presidential systems much less cohesive. Parliamentary systems are diverse in the input, convergent in action.
Oh, sometimes you get political coherence! That is precisely the worst case scenario: the charismatic President, powerfull in his Party, and with the Legislature.
There is a trade off between preference integration and Political coherence.
In a Presindentialist system you give large powers to a single person, so you have coherent and decisive policy, at the cost of disenfranchiment of half of the people, polarization and the danger of turning presidentialism into dictatorship.
Presidentialism is mini autocracy, and it has some of its advantages, as described by Hobbes. For me the advantages are modest, the Risk enormous.
The problem is you don't get integration and political coherence, quite the opposite. The separation of powers make presidential systems much less cohesive. Parliamentary systems are diverse in the input, convergent in action.
Oh, sometimes you get political coherence! That is precisely the worst case scenario: the charismatic President, powerfull in his Party, and with the Legislature.