[sinkspur]

What about Americans who oppose both abortion and an aggressive foreign policy, or who are against affirmative action but also believe in environmental protection? Our system effectively disenfranchises them. Anyone whose views do not fit neatly into either the Democratic or Republican categories has no way of effectively making his rulers "answerable" to him without compromising on essential principles.

Yes he does. He can work to convince a majority of Americans to his views. Or, do you assume that other Americans should just roll over because you are "enlightened"?

I'd rather have a head of state who no one chose than a head of state who others voted for but I did not.

You would, in essence, prefer a tyranny, as long as that tyrant agreed with you.

[royalcello]

He can work to convince a majority of Americans to his views.

Convincing a king might be easier. And as I point out above, the support of a majority of Americans hasn't helped the cause of immigration reform.

You would, in essence, prefer a tyranny, as long as that tyrant agreed with you.

Since I do not equate Monarchy with Tyranny, and in fact believe that historically Tyranny has generally been the consequence of abolishing Monarchies, no, I would not.