Welcome to Gaia! ::

Well, my main concern with having a president as opposed to a monarch would be because:

a. Would he/she remain neutral in state affairs?
b. Monarchic titles sound more awesome than "President"
c. How would a president be picked?

I'm personally ambivilent of the current monarchy in Canada. If there were a sudden change tomorrow, I would be opposed to the lifting of a monarchy because well, I'm just skeptical as to how our new head of state would be picked.


But then I realised something. When The Queen will die, Prince Charles wouldn't automatically become our king. Rather, the next monarch has to be unanimously accepted by provincial governments and the federal government, each given an equal vote in the process. This process I agree with to an extent/

So what about legislation? Legislation which sets a term limit, 5 years, on this "president" who must be born in Canada and be above a certain age.

Perhaps something like the way India does it, but picking the president is not limited to the constraints under the Indian system. The presidential candidates can be nominated by the provincial/federal legislators.

But really, in the end, I just don't want them to be called a "President". It doesn't sound awesome.

Essentially ITT, pick out an awesome name for the head of state for a republic. Or should we just stick to "Governer General"?

God Emporer lofl