[bestkeptsecret]

I like the independence of the US presidency. The UK PM is intentionally a bit weaker so as not to be a threat to the monarch.

I think the US could potentially be ungovernable with that configuration. As weird as it is to see the Democrats lose two presidential elections of the last 5 presidential election while winning urban majorities, the majority of the people across the territory have the government they want. It is increasingly leading to unlikely politicians though. Clinton, Obama and Trump were sort of unthinkable politicians, but they won.

Its also perhaps a mistake to equate the UK PM to the US presidency when considering powers. While the UK and US system of government are different, and none of the roles and powers are directly comparable you can draw some parallels.

In many respects Congress is equivent to Parliament. For the US its the house of Representatives for the UK it is the House of Commons. The US has the Senate, The UK has the House of Lords.

In the UK legislation is passed in the Commons, then passed in the Lords, then it goes to Royal Assent. In the US it is The representative, then the Senate, then goes to the President.

When you compare the two systems it would seem more appropriate to compare the US President to the UK Monarch and then the UK Prime Minister to the Speaker of the house of Representatives.

In theory the UK Monarch has more power than the President but in practice, it is impractical for the Monarch to exercise that power. One reason for this is that the UK's equivilent of Executive Order is Crown Prerogative, but in practice the UK Prime Minister uses that power on behalf of the Crown.