What if the U.S. used the parliamentary system?

[@supersejkaj3093]

In an alternate universe: JJ denounced by Texas government.

[@technofanatic01]

Quebec really is the Texas of Canada

[@tacomaster7338]

@@technofanatic01 as a texan I don't think we are

[@WillCooperBagpipes]

@@technofanatic01 Definitely not, that's Alberta

[@jakubpociecha8819]

I guess we'd also have to swap JJ with his American equivalent, Mr. Beat

[@sokonek1]

@@tacomaster7338 oh for sure, all I ever hear is how Texas culture is so different from the rest of the United States, and Texas is always passing laws that make issue for the federal government.

[@tamutorro9560]

JJ: "Prime Minister Nancy Pelosi" Republicans & Progressives: I feel faint....

[@abhaypartapdhindsa2697]

No fricking way she becomes prime minister.

[@peterromeo4379]

Hillary Clinton: Hell yeah

[@marko32603]

I feel the faint too but I don't think she would be PM since she's not the majority leader of the house. Thats Rep. Steny Hoyer.

[@jonahsuresh1391]

@@marko32603 She would still be PM because she's the leader of the democrats in the house. Hoyer is the second ranking democrat in the house When the democrats are in the minority in the house, she's the minority leader.

[@ethanomcbride]

@@marko32603 Speaker is actually a partisan position in the US, so Pelosi acts a head of the party in her positions within the house

[@toguskyre]

I used to think that the Australian Senate, which is structured almost exactly the same as the US senate (so small states get disproportionate influence) was the most undemocratic institution. Then JJ informed me about the abomination that is the Canadian senate and suddenly the Aus Senate doesn’t seem all that bad

[@paulsherman2820]

There is a reason each state gets equal representation in the Senate. It's because if everything was determined the most populous areas they would determine all policy in the country including states that have mostly rural areas. The problem with that is it would have major effects on agriculture, considering most people in the city have no clue about agricultural knowledge. They would assume policies that favor agriculture would be frivolous spending and there for do away with many said policies. The good thing about the way America is set up is that even though there is equal representation in the Senate, the house of representatives is proportionate to populous and most bills have to go through both the house and Senate before it even gets to the president's desk. Unfortunately because of this, it is a very slow moving process, it however allows for a great network of checks and balances, therefore sustaining a very balanced governing body.

[@MP-dn4bs]

@@paulsherman2820 instead we have rural areas and interests being overrepresented in the House, Senate, electoral votes->presidency and as a result the judiciary system and yes the house favors rural interests, cities being more packed together you have the entire country assuming policies that are good for cities are frivolous spending and they have done away with those policies (transportation, infrastructure, etc.)

[@British_navy]

@@MP-dn4bs We are parlimentary remember, Scomo our PM, Unfourtenetly we aren't a republic.

[@Christopher_TG]

That's because the Canadian Senate is modeled after the British House of Lords, which is a similarly undemocratic and controversial institution.

[@Nephalem2002]

Boy we’re the 5th most democratic country the f*** are you talking about

[@loganhagler1889]

"The Governor General wouldn't be some big time celeberty" *sad Kanye West noise*

[@jarjarbinks6018]

Therapist: Prime Minister Pelosi isn’t real. She can’t hurt you Prime Minister Pelosi:

[@user-nf9xc7ww7m]

As she is the speaker, she would need to be a neutral moderator--no more political statements as it would be grounds for removal. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer would be the prime minister. Biden would have to be non-partisan too (parliamentary style president as in Germany). He would be relegated to signing bills, regardless of his views, and waving. If he threatened to veto, there would be riots and a constitutional crisis. Kevin McCarthy would be the leader of the official (and only real) opposition until the US gets more parties.

[@littleretroship6403]

That thumbnail is scary

[@stevetaylor3939]

In a US Parliamentary system Pelosi would probably not be the leader of the Dems, and McCarthy is spineless so he certainly wouldn’t. McConnell (Senate Republican Leader) would probably not be either tbh, he’s much like Pelosi in that they are both very long tenured and great strategist etc. They get things done basically but not would be who you’d be looking to as the most exciting and energizing people to get your base out. Schumer (the Senate Majority Leader) maybe Biden probably wouldn’t be PM either as he planned to not run for President in 2020, he wouldn’t have held a seat so therefore he couldn’t. And tbh Trump wouldn’t have happened at all because he’d had to have gotten a seat, become leader of the Republicans in the fastest amount of time ever, and become PM. I think that goes to show how the Parliamentary system keeps out short term extremism, but the Legislative/Executive system allows for spread out of powers and for grass roots purely best person decided by the majority of the people to happen (though the electoral college voting & “faithless electors” being allowed to happen is kind’ve a last ditch effort/way to stop extremism from becoming President)

[@PremierCCGuyMMXVI]

Nightmare fuel lol

[@no2party]

She'd throw on a black cloak and do her best Palpatine impression.

[@salavecis2]

I imagine JJ would be banned from Louisiana

[@RemnantCult]

Louisianan here. He's more than welcome there!

[@sanmarino8605]

Lol took me a sec to get that

[@ThePooper3000]

He would probably sue the state, since states can't constitutionally ban someone from entering it.

[@Lakster37]

@@ThePooper3000 I mean, if LA was under the Canadian system, apparently they could. Quebec on the other hand wouldn't be able to keep him out anymore.

[@xtensioncordtv1969]

@@tetuben2879 the goverment can ban travel if it has a good reason lol. Do you think we should abolish prisons because they don't allow prisoners to travel.

[@Iknowthismeme]

Everyone: laughing because Pelosi is the worst person to be pm Me: laughing because Pelosi means furry in my language

[@adamferencszi797]

In her grandparents' language too lol because she's fully Italian from both her maternal and paternal side of the family. I swear who came up with that last name??

[@Iknowthismeme]

@@adamferencszi797 trust me, in Italy we have worse

[@adamferencszi797]

@@Iknowthismeme luckily they sound nice to non Italian speakers who can't recognize their meaning lol. I remenber the Pazzi from the medieval Renaissance. And their name sounded pretty cool in English until you learn Italian and you're like ohh lol.

[@petonchiospataponchio366]

@@Iknowthismeme "Felice Della Sega"

[@lepidotos]

@@adamferencszi797 the Italians, apparently.

[@Mankorra_Gomorrah]

“American prime minister” is such a cursed phrase that i physically recoiled

[@RemnantCult]

I can imagine the US adopting English and Spanish as official languages if it were to go all Canadian.

[@globallyfamouse6609]

the us already kinds of does that

[@FOLIPE]

They don't have any official languages in the US though.

[@mrworldwidegenghiskhan9959]

@@harry3461 You're taught a second language in every country

[@Fragolux]

If one or more states become majority Hispanic, I could conceivably see the rise of a "Bloque Latino" type party or caucus within Congress.

[@carfreeneoliberalgeorgisty5102]

@@tetuben2879 are there any German speaking communities in America today outside of the Amish/Mennonite communities in Pennsylvania and the "Texas German" communities in New Braufels Texas?

[@overthecounterbeanie]

Oh my god, Justin Trudeau is Canadian Nancy Pelosi. That explains so much.

[@PrinceofMilk]

I'm a democrat and I agree with this statement

[@missanthropicnihilist2830]

*mind blown* 🤯

[@maxmetodiev641]

He looks like he could be her son

[@elliot04877]

@@maxmetodiev641 Nah too cuban

[@lajya01]

I'd never thought I could say that but Trudeau isn't so bad now

[@JamesOKeefe-US]

The Prime Minister Pelosi segment really drives home the terror we feel from JJ about the concerns on checks for power in Canada. It actually really helped me understand the disconnect there better. As always, thank you for somehow making me interested in our political systems. Bless you man :) 🤘

[@stanislausklim7794]

Honestly, it makes me grateful living under the US style of government.

[@markdin2988]

@@stanislausklim7794 based American exceptionalism

[@williamcarruthers8334]

@@stanislausklim7794 US doesn’t get it right either. Like it’s impossible to get anything passed and it’s completely stupid to have 3 branches. IMO getting things done > checks on democratically elected leaders. I quite like the UK system, where a leader can basically create most laws, but they get watered down a bit in House of Lords. And if after that it’s still controversial, then there is public outrage and the pm normally just gives up as they don’t want to lose the next election.

[@spartanx9293]

@@williamcarruthers8334 it's impossible to get anything passed because that's the point the government is designed specifically to preserve the status quo changes only come when they are definitively needed and universally supported

[@kramcherryp197]

@@spartanx9293 I honestly think it's stupid having very little change happen just to preserve the status quo, and to be quite honest we need anything but the status quo in America right now

[@Wompwompwomp.ny1]

The fact that everyone here is terrified of the notion of a Prime Minister Pelosi gives me hope for the world

[@visaman]

Steny Hoyer would be PM not Nancy.

[@joshuaalfaro4781]

@@visaman Nope, Nancy is the democratic leader

[@davegreenlaw5654]

@@joshuaalfaro4781 No, she was only elected Speaker by the House of Representatives, much like our speaker was elected by the House of Commons. She would have to formally run for the leadership of the federal Democrats, which is not a guarantee that she would be the leader and then Prime Minister. Albert is correct, that Steny Hoyer, currently House Majority Leader, would be the Prime Minister...again, *if* he had already been the official party leader. (Much like the current Minority House Leader, Kevin McCarthy would be considered the leader of the official opposition, as long as he won the leadership of the federal Republicans.

[@archiereilly3137]

It doesn’t matter where you are on the political spectrum, Prime Minister Pelosi, is a horrifying world

[@marodriba]

People on both sides of the aisle in America shuddered at the thought of a “Prime Minister Pelosi”

[@JML6988]

Yes, we do shudder!

[@TheAmericanPrometheus]

Sometimes I feel cynical about the American system, but the thought of a PM Pelosi having near total control over all of American politics has made me realize that it could be much, much worse.

[@sokonek1]

The thing is, she wouldn’t be the candidate for Prime Minister, nor would Kevin McCarthy, being there would be so many more people in the house, I would guess it would be Ted Cruz or Josh Hawley for the Republicans and Chuck Shumer or Elizabeth Warren for the Democrats

[@arcticelephant4721]

Oh god 😳

[@efarren1563]

@@sokonek1 Mate, there are no candidates for Prime Minister within the same party. The PM is the de jure leader of the largest party in lower house of parliament. A larger house won't matter since the leader of a political party is usually chosen by internal party elections.

[@KingOfInsanity777]

"Vive le Texas Libre!"- Gov. Abbott, alternate reality. Edit: Happy B-Day JJ!

[@2tri749]

No it'd be more like "¡Viva Texas libre!" - Gov. Abbott, alternate reality

[@FOLIPE]

@@2tri749 Gov. Abueto

[@tktru]

@@2tri749 Tejas

[@haydent4461]

More like Premier Abbott in this alternate reality

[@natenae8635]

@@haydent4461 You mean Lt Governor Abbot because leader of the State House would be premier.

[@gmicg]

One day, General Eisenhower complained to General de Gaulle that his job as President was exhausting, de Gaulle answered "do like me, take a Prime Minister".

[@politicaladarchive2763]

“I hope this map offends you” - j.j Me looking at Wisconsin in the same division as Kentucky and Florida - “What?”

[@NotKimiRaikkonen]

Me in Wisconsin, agreeing with you...

[@Matt-yg8ub]

@@NotKimiRaikkonen As do all of us in Wisconsin

[@Otterlord14]

indeed

[@SamAronow]

I often imagine that, if the US had a parliamentary system, 2008 would have seen Barack Obama become Prime Minister and Joe Biden become ceremonial President.

[@theobuniel9643]

Speaking of which, who do you think would be the ceremonial Presidents of a hypothetical parliamentary U.S. would be? Knowing the pattern of many modern-day Canadian Gov. Gens in recent years, I'd imagine people like Chuck Yeager or Michael Collins who would be candidates for that: well-respected in their fields, but not that well-known by the general public.

[@SamAronow]

@@theobuniel9643 See, I live in Israel, where the ceremonial president *is* a career politician, just not a *top* politician. I think that's the setup that the US would end up with.

[@theobuniel9643]

@@SamAronow Hmm... if that's the case, then maybe someone like John McCain or Patrick Leahy (currently the longest-serving senator in the U.S.) would be eligible?

[@CharlieQuartz]

Barack Obama was a political outsider and unlikely to be chosen by the Democrat party for PM

[@ckpal3575]

Actually the leader of the party with the majority of seats in the house becomes Prime Minister

[@iamkonner4813]

Can you just imagine three Supreme Court Justices from Texas, them in their robes and cowboy hats.

[@alsatusmd1A13]

Justice Beto O’Rourke?

[@iamkonner4813]

@@alsatusmd1A13 Justice Matthew McConaughey

[@jeremiakevin]

@@iamkonner4813 Alright alright alright...

[@Hand-in-Shot_Productions]

Thanks for the laughs! Cowboy justices sound like an interesting system!

[@emeraldcrusade5016]

@@Hand-in-Shot_Productions Ew

[@adamgreene9938]

I think the best part about this is that our supreme court would be forced to dress like Santa Claus

[@superduck6456]

“Prime Minister Pelosi” That’s a slightly horrifying thought.

[@ictoan5966]

Very horrifying

[@user-nf9xc7ww7m]

As she is the speaker, she would need to be a neutral moderator--no more political statements as it would be grounds for removal. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer would be the prime minister. Biden would have to be non-partisan too (parliamentary style president as in Germany). He would be relegated to signing bills, regardless of his views, and waving. If he threatened to veto, there would be riots and a constitutional crisis. Kevin McCarthy would be the leader of the official (and only real) opposition until the US gets more parties.

[@superduck6456]

@@user-nf9xc7ww7m Eh, I don’t know; since the majority party’s leader becomes the speaker of the house, I feel like that position is more the US equivalent of the Prime Minister than the majority leader. There really is no US equivalent to the neutral, parliamentary-style speaker.

[@landenmichelin4949]

Yeah

[@ciceroforreal]

no good thought

[@JasonMoir]

One small correction: not all states have a winner-take-all approach to the Electoral College. Maine and Nebraska pro-rate the electors based on Congressional districts.

[@alsatusmd1A13]

States can even send both the electors for their popular vote winner and the national popular vote winner if they want.

[@vulpes7079]

Why even have electors then, just throw the votes

[@Sizey3]

I'd imagine this small footnote in the EC system was overlooked because what exactly are the Canadian equivalents of Maine and Nebraska?

[@vulpes7079]

@@Sizey3 I somewhat feel like Saskatchewan could fill in for both, because who the fuck thinks about Saskatchewan?

[@LiveFreeOrDieDH]

@@Sizey3 You need at least 2 congressional districts in a state for this to even make sense, and Maine and Nebraska make up 9 EC votes combined. So I'd say the best bet would be to pick either New Brunswick or Nova Scotia as your only "potentially-split EC-vote" state.

[@minevance9461]

Next episode: what if Tuvalu and Papua New Guinea switched

[@JJMcCullough]

World War 3

[@HiMyNameJosher]

@@JJMcCullough i agree

[@TheAmericanPrometheus]

What if the PRC and the USA switched governments? it'd be pretty interesting to see how a purely theoretical rubber stamp government would function if it were properly representative and vice versa.

[@eoghan.5003]

What if India and North Sentinel Island switched?

[@smashingthreeplates2171]

What if Australia and New Zealand switched places!

[@simpson82k]

This is probably going to go down on history as one of this channel's most under valued/appreciated videos. What a fun and well presented thought experiment, I'm so glad I buckled up for the ride. It is information dense and I did have to rewind and rewatch it a bunch to follow, not necessarily a bad thing as it's a video after all. Would definitely welcome more videos like this!

[@Kolateak_]

"American Prime Minister" is one of the most cursed phrases I've ever heard

[@jalenr.6542]

@@ginch8300 no not really

[@jalenr.6542]

@@ginch8300 what? Lol

[@TFMark]

@@ginch8300 yo if he personally asked me, sure. a zombie king? neato

[@mayloo2137]

To me, that's up there with Canadian President.

[@SomethingSpecial.]

The idea of santa clause being an American supreme Court judge brings me joy

[@joshuaminton7583]

Which party would he be part of or would he be a third party candidate

[@jacearnold4093]

Punishment: not getting gifts from Santa at Christmas which we already don't

[@jacearnold4093]

@President P. Wilber Oinker get back into the real life

[@NintendoLover2005]

@@joshuaminton7583 I think he'd be independent

[@rockstopsthetraffic]

I can see why a person from BC in particular would feel that the senate divisions of Canada are badly outdated, lol.

[@markhanson408]

There was a bipartisan proposal, about 10 years ago, to make BC it's own 12 seat division and increase Alberta's seats in the West division. It went nowhere, as with dozens of other reform attempts.

[@rockstopsthetraffic]

@@markhanson408 that would have been a fairly sensible move.

[@markhanson408]

@@rockstopsthetraffic It was the Austin/Murray reform bill of 2006. It went nowhere because a reform to the Senate needs to pass in the house of commons, and in the Senate, and have the support of 2/3rds of the provinces, AND must have the support of the majority of the population. It is a VERY cumbersome constitution. Making the whole ordeal somewhat pointless is the appointment of senators by a prime minister who's own interests would often run contrary to the region for which he makes the appointments.

[@ginch8300]

Speaking as someone from B.C., the senate is not only outdated, but also a pointless waste of time and money.

[@rockstopsthetraffic]

@@ginch8300 I mean C-10 was stopped by the fact that the Senate wasn't gonna deliberate it before the break, I think, so maybe by accident it isn't all that bad. Unironically, though, I wouldn't advocate for a unicameral federal Parliament. Something needs to check the HoC, on some level.

[@davidmehling4310]

We're taught in school the reason every state has the same number of Senators is so that less populated states have a voice and aren't overshadowed by populated states. Until 1913 US Senators were appointed by state legislatures. Would be beneficial I think for the US to have more than two parties represented in Congress which seems to be normal in a parliamentary system. Thank you for teaching us about Canadian politics, history, and culture

[@lukeporras1288]

From the founders’ perspective, it wasn’t just so that small states had to same voice as big ones. The Senate represents the states in their sovereign capacity. That’s why the legislature originally chose them and that’s why each state had equal representation. They basically were supposed to be ambassadors.

[@jj6407]

"Prime minister Nancy Pelosi" Dies of cringe

[@ComicSansMcGee]

I don't think anything can terrify me as much as the phrase "prime Minister Nancy Pelosi".

[@ralphp224]

I don’t see anything wrong with it. Sounds interesting.

[@abhaypartapdhindsa2697]

@@ralphp224 if you have seen her then you will understand why she isnt someone you would want being a leader

[@anonymousperson3023]

@@ralphp224 it does sound interesting. Interestingly terrifying

[@hitmontree3736]

@@ralphp224 "We have to pass the Bill to see what's in it" - Nancy Pelosi.

[@lajya01]

The biggest flaw in this video is overlooking the primaries in the US vs the leadership race in Canada. All official Democrat members would have to elect the leader and she would had to fight with Clinton, Biden, Sanders, Obama, etc... No chance she would have won that race.

[@nebscale4192]

I can't imagine the noise if the US had a 3000 member parliament!

[@williamking6787]

You could probably hear outside DC

[@Croz89]

Imagine the galactic senate from Star Wars. Nothing would get done.

[@imrehundertwasser7094]

@Agastya Rana 545? How puny :-) The German Bundestag has 709 at the moment, and it might become even bigger after the upcoming election in September.

[@mayloo2137]

@@Croz89 I prefer the Star Trek Federation of Planets. Much more dignified in comparison.

[@stanislausklim7794]

@Agastya Rana it's a little under 3000, right?

[@juliegolick]

6:29 Actually Ontario's population is ONE HUNDRED times PEI's, not ten times!

[@stpaley]

do i hear California & Wyoming laughing

[@keturahspencer]

As you're describing the Northern Territories, the closest American equivalent I can think of is Washington DC. Their license plate even states "taxation without representation."

[@reinjouke9743]

or puerto rico, guam, u.s virgin islands etc. the territories of the united states

[@JMM33RanMA]

I've been a fan of this channel for a long time, and this has got to be, hands down, the best US related political video JJ has, to my knowledge, come up with so far. I have read some alternate history novels of what the US would have been like if the Revolution had failed or if the country had stuck with parliamentary systems. This is the most thoughtful and plausible. Massachusetts seems to have set the model followed consistently. When the Crown tried to abolish colonial and local government the colonial parliament went into rebellion, the members continuing to be elected in town meetings, met outside Boston, and usurped all royal authority. The revolutionary congress promulgated the present state [Commonwealth] constitution in 1780 and continues to govern under it. Though it has been amended many times it is still the foundation of our government which is considered one of the oldest in continuous operation. Newer states have often copied it, only Nebraska has a unicameral legislature, and only Louisiana uses parishes instead of counties. However in New England the towns and cities have rendered counties either nonfunctional or mere court districts, unlike the rest of the country. There is an oversight in picturing a US Senate for Canada. If each of the barely populated Dakotas has two senators then a US style Canadian senate would give each of the Maritimes two senators and the territories would have the kind of presidentially appointed governor and elected legislatures our territorial governments had. They would have observes in the Congress but no vote. There is another oversight in the regions proposed for the US. New England and the South are similar to Quebec on cultural identity and hostility to outsiders, Texas, Apalachis and other areas are distinct, so the method proposed in the video would not work here. Not only has the Massachusetts legislature vague similarities to the former royal one, the Supreme Judicial court is a rebranded and wigless colonial court from the 17th Century. There are some conservative principles that tie our form of government to Britain, the Holy Roman Empire and Switzerland. The Federal government is an idealization of what the English Colonists believed that the English government should be. My reading indicates that these ideas were floated before the revolution. I believe that the Electoral College was taken from the HRE and independence of local states from the HRE and Switzerland. All in all, this is a very thought provoking video. It should definitely not be missed by anyone with an interest in comparative government. Kudos to my Friend JJ/Bravo à mon ami JJ!

[@robertabella1806]

It's weird to think the Holy Roman Empire and the United States of America existed at the same time briefly

[@vulpes7079]

​@@robertabella1806Damn you're right The US started in 1776, the Holy Roman Empire ended in 1806

[@LucasBenderChannel]

Happy birthday J.J.!!! 🎉🎉🎉 Hope you're having a nice day :)

[@Sam-vy8ye]

It's suprising how different the Canadian and Australian Senate systems work, especially when we consider that in all other aspects Canada and Australia have a very similar political systems. Both are Commonwealth countries with the Queen as our head of state represented by a Governor-General, both have parliamentary and federal systems and of course a Prime Minister. The way our Senate is actually more closer to that of the US, every state has an equal number of senators (six) who serve 6 year terms and during elections only half of the senate seats are up for election. I assume this is the case because while our Senate was based on Washington, Canada's Senate was probably based on the UK's House of Lords, which is generally made up of Lords appointed by the PM.

[@RaymondHng]

In the the United States Senate, one-third of the 100 seats are up for election every two years.

[@Corwin256]

This is the second video I've watched today examining what appears to be a totally ridiculous question not worth asking, and yet uncovers some really profound concepts worthy of extended thought and consideration. In both cases, while the question itself doesn't find much of a real answer, the process of asking uncovers many other questions and these other questions can have great worth. Thanks for sharing this with us.

[@SeanA099]

I never realized just how powerful the PM of Canada could be

[@stanislausklim7794]

It's scary and really makes me grateful to live under the US style of government. It's not perfect, but it's as slow as it was originally intended to be plus the minority can make an effective resistance.

[@piusx8317]

Sean: He's not

[@Nephalem2002]

Depends on the person and the Government’s State. In a Majority Government our PM can do usually whatever he wants, but in a Minority Government he has to work together with the other parties and the other parties have to work together against him.

[@Nephalem2002]

@@stanislausklim7794 I can agree but your Senate’s also prevented the social progression of your Society by about 2 Decades.

[@quuaaarrrk8056]

George III. would rejoice about getting his colonies back.

[@emeraldcrusade5016]

But loses canada :/

[@whattheydidnttellyouwithbr2844]

Too bad he's dead and can't enjoy it.

[@quuaaarrrk8056]

@@whattheydidnttellyouwithbr2844 What do you mean? He simply switched profession, to make sure Napoleon doesn't come again.

[@leatherjack123]

Well; he wouldn't be getting them back as a colony. Canada is still independent, it's just in a personal union with the UK (i.e., whoever is Queen of the UK is also at the same time, separately Queen of Canada). That's literally it. The British prime minister, government and parliament have no power whatsoever over Canada in any form.

[@rajkaranvirk7525]

Canada is not a colony, it's independent.

[@r0yce]

As an Indian...DO NOT use the parliamentary system in the US. Believe me, your country is not suited to such democracy. Instead you might think about using a many party presidential system, you know, more than 2.

[@sirius_b_13]

The amount of hilarious innuendos, jokes, and flagrant arbitrary yet somehow logical shaming of undemocratic processes in this video is amazing. Great job JJ, now ill just re-watch it 3 times before sending this to some friends to piss them off

[@JML6988]

Somehow, a "Pres. Trudeau is not nearly as disturbing as a "PM Pelosi"!

[@jasongreek2342]

"President Trudeau" would have a lot less power than he currently enjoys. I would be quite happy if he had to work within the constraints of a US-style presidency.

[@ohio9499]

PM pelosi almost gave me a heart attack

[@deutschekanadische]

“Prime Minister Trump” *help me please*

[@nickalexanderi]

Alternate News Headline: Conservative Writer J.J. McCullough denounced by Utah and Idaho Parliaments after "Controversial Views" on LDS Party. Edit: I love these kind of vids and I would love to see more theoretical political stories.

[@a.v.c.9028]

The French model is the best of both worlds because you have a President who is both the head of state and the commander in chief and a Prime Minister who is the head of government. Two people sharing distinct political powers and not concentrated on just one person.

[@budgetlifter]

would be interesting seeing the United States having multiple relatively relevant parties instead of just two big one's

[@hcct]

I have thought that a number of times too. Seems like on the ground we have at least four that are housed in the big two, but idk how anyone would ever win a majority vote for the presidency outside of a two party system unless they tried to do a coalition kind of ticket.

[@defaultkoala2922]

​@@hcct run off elections would be one solution. Might still be a race between Dems and Republicans but it would have more candidates in the first round that could be used as a popularity poll.

[@lauscar]

I've been hoping you'd do a video on your general thoughts on the parliamentary system some day!

[@diegoarmando5489]

I'd like him to make a video about political music. Between France, Mexico, Venezuela, Grenada, copyright infringement, and the Bloc Québécois, there's just so much fun to be had :)

[@steakismeat177]

One thing you’ve missed is the fact that the things with the US system of government are not as they seem. Maine recently switched to a very different election system. They’ve used instant runoff voting since the 2018 election. So Mainers rank their preferred candidates, giving third parties a decent stepping stone in our duopolistic political structure.

[@belg4mit]

Some cities in town in MA have been using IRV for decades. It was on the last ballot to go statewide but some people actually had the audacity to campaign against it claiming it was "undemocratic" and alas it was defeated. WTF? I can *kind of* understand complaining that it's "confusing" (but if one really cannot grok this simple enhancement, just put a 1 next to whoever you would have put an X and leave, job done). But undemocratic? That's some truly twisted logic...

[@bisque6448]

@@belg4mit lobbyists are a thoroughly corrupt and intellectually dishonest bunch like that

[@douglasmacarthur702]

And unsurprisingly that act of el*ctoral r*form led to them canning their based governor and getting taken over by libs. Fuck third parties, god save the duopoly. There are no serious arguments in favor of electoral reform.

[@steakismeat177]

@Chris Smith by things aren't the way they seem. I meant the US system seems to work in one way across the board, despite the fact that in most scenarios it is only held up by most states having the same policy and a few states buck the trend making the system actually more complex than people often realize. And for NY mayor that doesn't really effect anything here since we're discussing federal elections. When NY adopts this system for their federal elections then it starts to affect things.

[@steakismeat177]

@@douglasmacarthur702 Yet the duopoly prevents the person I assume you want as president from splitting from the Republicans without handing everything over to the Democrats. This electoral reform means that if the people say prefer a patriot party over the Republican party they can give it support until it wins while not splitting the vote and handing the election to the dems as a guaranteed victory. Under this system elections can actually become competitive. Right now we've got a bunch of fat cat politicians who can ignore their constituents because their re-election is practically guaranteed. When the spoiler effect is no longer a factor factions of the major parties will be free to break off into their own party. It will bring the free market of ideas in the political sphere

[@tylerkochman1007]

I had a professor who suggested that our politics might be less polarized with a parliamentary system. I responded by asking them if they thought Prime Minister Pelosi would not be polarizing.

[@raylampert1243]

This is the first of your videos I've seen and I really appreciate it! I like these sort of "what-if" scenarios and it's clear you did your homework here. In the US, even the most junior member of the House has a great deal of power, mainly through their committee assignments. In the Canadian system, only the ones who get Cabinet appointments really have much power, and that's subject to the PM's will. In the US it's hugely difficult to unseat a long-term member of Congress, and a lot of them are already successful business people or come from powerful families before they get elected. I wonder how a different system would affect that.

[@ratblack8207]

The division of the three powers in Canada are less "divided," which makes the two systems completely different

[@tolegonianfella5423]

This kind of makes me appreciate the USA’s power sharing system a little more

[@ReaperCH90]

The US system is good, that's why we copied it with some changes (thanks for inventing it). But I think it is really time to bring it up to date, e.g. the electoral college is not something that should have survived the 20th century.

[@declannewton2556]

Yeah, it also reminds of how shitty the parliamentary system is as a whole.

[@LG123ABC]

@@ReaperCH90 Without the Electoral College, small states would be completely ignored in presidential elections. New York and California would decide who would be president each and every time. This would inevitably lead to armed conflict as these two states have very little in common with the rest of the country.

[@ReaperCH90]

@@LG123ABC so? You have the Senate to overrepresent small states. If you have an executive the way you do it, your president should be elected by the majority and not by the majority of certain battleground states, and the rest can stay at home because their vote is unimportant. If you want to have more representation in the executive, split the president into multiple people equal among each other and make the legislatives elected them from all over the country. Or force the president to pick his cabinet from different states.

[@williamkrause5831]

@@ReaperCH90 what kind of “solutions” are those? I think I’d just rather keep the electoral college than do any of those. All of those ideas would massively negate the separation of powers principle that has kept the rise of tyrants in this country for so long. The constitution is the framework for the longest continuous democracy in history anyways so I think its doing a fine job. If something important needs to be changed, they’ll make an amendment for it like they did with slavery and women’s sufferage.

[@albertvaldez214]

As a US citizen, my head hurts. Lol seriously though, this video was very informative. I understand a little bit more how the government in Canada works. And thank GOD, we don't have that system here. We want and need term limits for both the House and Senate.

[@joelaposata3851]

Hey JJ- quick correction. The electoral college isn't *necessarily* winner-take-all, that's just how most states choose to run it. 2 states, Maine and Nebraska, award their EVs to the winner of each congressional district, with the 2 at-large EVs (from their senate delegation) being awarded to the statewide winner. So it's possible, in this theoretical scenario, that some of the provinces would divide their EVs by riding!

[@lwolfer5170]

This is all information that I've heard before, but the way you presented it really helped make it stick. I really loved the imaginative and theoretical way you played with the two systems.

[@JD-ss2pm]

Hey JJ, great video! Suggestion for possible next video: times when the Canadian Senate did not just rubberstamp legislation passed by our MPs (if that ever happened)

[@scottgraham7670]

They just recently sent the controversial bill C-10 to committee, not voting against it directly but delaying it, possibly until an election makes it moot.

[@Hand-in-Shot_Productions]

Never dreamed that I would hear words like "American Prime Minister" or "President of Canada" before! More seriously, I find your lesson about political principles to be quite interesting! For instance, some Americans would think that "until the age of 75" is long enough for a Supreme Court judge, and as you said, they wouldn't want a US president to be "ghoulishly waiting for them to die"!

[@campbelloflongbranch]

That was an absolutely fantastic explorative discussion JJ! Well done! You should do a follow up on what a Canadian integration into the American Union would look like!

[@kingofcards9516]

Prime minister pelosi, what a nightmare.

[@straypaperplane]

As an american, im quicky learning that in spite of my limited political involvement, im really tetchy about how my government does things

[@iarmandov2]

As a Texan your senate logic behind it is the most Texas thing I’ve heard and I approve of it haha 😂

[@alcarbo8613]

Moral of the story, Canada probably needs to embrace a US style Senate, with checks and balances on the PM

[@visaman]

In theory that is what we have now. The Senate represents The Crown.

[@harryasmith527]

Most cursed thumbnail ever.

[@theduane1562]

JJ! I think it would be really cool for you to do a deep dive into New Jersey’s State and Local politics. When compared to most states it’s wildly different and is known by politicos across the country as being unique.

[@ayenul4256]

“Prime Minister Nancy Pelosi” *Everyone disliked that.*

[@cfcreative1]

How would you know KZbin is not democratic and JJ is a shill for the new world order. Go back to sleep.

[@jeremiakevin]

"¡Viva la Texas Libre!" El Teniente Gobernador Abbott de Texas ¡Feliz Cumpleaños, JJ!

[@Tzar1]

I think that Sask would most likely have 1 Conservative and 1 NDP senator, but it honestly depends on the year

[@unbreakableunion]

Sask will flip rarely from cons to NDP and even Liberal from time to time.

[@Tzar1]

@@unbreakableunion I doubt the Liberal Party would win anything in Sask for a while. People are a bit annoyed with them

[@boomshocks]

6:20 not 10x it's size but 90x it's size (more realistically about 94x its size)

[@lwolfer5170]

Came here to say this.

[@davidg2521]

Yup, the math was way off.

[@momoluey7837]

The Canadian Senate is not an example of democracy. As for the US, he's definitely right about the electoral college.

[@joshuamclean4588]

Technically because queen is the “head of state,” she would be the equivalent of president in Canada… however in practice thats not the case. She does not have the same role the president has in the us, but she is the “head of state.”

[@jfrm_559]

Last time I was this early, JJ still had short hair.

[@Tristanluvgod]

Eat your cereal

[@jfrm_559]

@@Tristanluvgod Join your local Talentless Cult today.

[@Tristanluvgod]

@@jfrm_559 lol

[@imalonerdottie]

Last time I was this early JJ had his old long hair instead of his new long hair

[@KnuxMaster368]

10:33 Speaker and Majority leader in the US House are two separate positions. It’s just that when the opposition gains power, the House Minority Leader becomes speaker, and the Minority whip becomes Majority leader. Not that it would change much, except for who actually is “in charge” in that scenario.

[@JJMcCullough]

That’s why I said Senate majority leader

[@KnuxMaster368]

@@JJMcCullough There is a separate *House* Majority Leader position that is a bit more obscure. But I am not sure whether it would really change much in that scenario aside from who might hold the Speaker and Majority leader positions in the House.

[@LG123ABC]

@@JJMcCullough You could argue that the true leader of the Senate is the Vice President of the US -- who is the President of the Senate and has the power to break all tie votes.

[@JJMcCullough]

@@LG123ABC she doesn’t control the senate agenda or committee or anything important like that though.

[@sanaaselby4403]

Happy birthday J.J 🎉🎉🎈🍰 hope you have the most amazing day, and thank you for this video I've thought about this topic so much, its good to see it well researched in theory.

[@Terrell070]

The forced to retire thing would be great. Apply it accross all political positions. A parliment with porportional representation with the U.S. would destroy gerrymandering, allow 3rd parties just require them to at least get 5% of the nationwide vote, and it's partisan composition would reflect how ballots were cast. You'd have to make governing coalitions, which would probably be decided informally during the lame duck, and formally voted for in the next Congress.

[@silvamoi7040]

Imagine if africa and North America Switched economical standings

[@togerboy5396]

Europe would’ve never left the Americas.

[@lajya01]

We would freeze to death

[@mazimadu]

@@lajya01 I was going to say things will be the same, but this comment is better

[@RFSpadeDan]

Putting an age limit on the Supreme Court would just encourage whichever party’s in charge to fill any vacant seat with the youngest possible nominee, regardless of qualifications.

[@JJMcCullough]

That’s already what happens now

[@jebthegodemperor7301]

what they need is a term limit like 18 years

[@jebthegodemperor7301]

@@gravityissues5210 contrary to what you might think, the lack of term limits actually contributes to a political culture. Justices try to retire during the term of a President who is sympathetic to their ideology and thus likely to replace them with a likeminded individual, in effect allowing justices to appoint their successors. Life tenure also incentivizes presidents to nominate really young judges in order to maximize their influence for decades to come.

[@jebthegodemperor7301]

@@gravityissues5210 I prefer term limits to age limits

[@LG123ABC]

@@jebthegodemperor7301 So you're okay with senile (Diane Feinstein) people being in positions of power? Even airline pilots are forced to retire due to safety concerns. This is not a new idea. If we must go with term limits then I propose a "rule of 12": you can be elected to the house for six 2-year terms, the senate for two 6-year terms, the presidency for three 4-year terms or you can be appointed to the Supreme Court for one 12-year term. This way all three branches are limited to 12 years and no one has an advantage.

[@kalemacpherson2270]

J.J. is a better teacher than what I had in grade 12 and that teacher I had was pretty much the superior standard of greatness for a teacher.

[@connorward2400]

It would be interesting if you did a comparison video of the Canadian Senate and the British House of Lords. I wonder which institution is most in need of reform.

[@johnpijano4786]

Nothing made me more sick as seeing that title. I still watched it.

[@nigelramkissoonraja6916]

Maximum respect from Trinidad and Tobago Caribbean 🇹🇹✨❤️ Viva Cuba ✨ Haiti 💯🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@declannewton2556]

A trinbagonian huh?

[@nigelramkissoonraja6916]

@@declannewton2556 absolutely correct bro ✅✌️🇹🇹❤️one love ✨

[@declannewton2556]

@@nigelramkissoonraja6916 Really rare to find another one on the internet when you're not looking at explicitly trinidad stuff.

[@nigelramkissoonraja6916]

@@declannewton2556 thanks ‼️ where're you from bro✨🇹🇹

[@richardcarlson127]

12:30 Actually two states (Nebraska and Maine) allocate Electoral College votes in other than "Winner Take All". Rules vary a bit between them but they can (and often are) split. For your example I would chose Manitoba and Nova Scotia as the closest provinces to approximate Nebraska and Maine in your scenario.

[@vulpes7079]

As of now, the US House of Representatives would have 2991 members, if the Canadian number (1 rep. for every 111,166 people) was applied to it. This is 11 representatives more than the National People's Congress of China, currently the largest legislative body on Earth. Just for funsies: if China applied the same logic to the National People's Congress, it would consist of 12,999 representatives (probably 13000+ by next election). It's elected by electoral colleges for each province, so there is no real magic number here, but there are roughly 1 representative for every 484,932 people

[@AtzeHHouse]

From the latest poll I have seen on the Senate, most Canadians actually want to keep it, though most want to it to be reformed somewhat.

[@JJMcCullough]

The status quo Senate has something like a 2% approval rating.

[@LG123ABC]

@@JJMcCullough Your Senate does sound completely useless to an outsider like me.

[@AtzeHHouse]

@@JJMcCullough Which is why I said that most people who are in favour of keeping it, want it changed.

[@AmritpreetSingh]

14:00 It would make more sense for the US to have a ceremonial president similar to the Commonwealth republics instead of a governor-general.

[@garrettc8143]

Even though their legislatures and executives are pretty different, the United States and Canada mostly use Common Law (instead of Civil Law), which is kind of like the "operating system" of the respective political systems. It ultimately controls how the judicial branch works, but also strongly influences the other branches of government. Things like court case precedent, adversarial court cases with juries, and judicial (common) law are features of a Common law system. I think it would be easier to swap governments between common law jurisdictions than between another system!

[@DiamondKingStudios]

Under Canada's system, we roughly ten million inhabitants of Georgia get one senator, but the folks of Mississippi, a state with a substantially lower population, get _three_ senators. May as well cross the river since the population/senator ratio is much more favorable there.

[@bj0rn986]

8:45 actually with your numbers, Hawaii and Montana would each get a second representative because of their senators.

[@benjaminprietop]

It does make me wonder how difficult it was in countries that did in fact change their political system, like Turkey, that changed to a presidential system under Erdogan.

[@JJMcCullough]

Yeah but presumably they didn’t change their entire system of tabulating Parliament seats

[@joshualieblein5223]

JJ: Into the JJverse, streaming now on Disney+

[@ChadEnglishPhD]

A very fun thought experiment. I've gone as far as explaining to someone how Nancy Pelosi would be more like the Canadia PM in terms of election process, but to see the rest laid out with the math too is brilliant. Great stuff. Another interesting piece might be from the voter point of view. In the U.S. they vote for Congress Rep, 2 Senators, and President. In Canada we just vote for the local riding rep, which brings up the fun and neverending debates about voting for the indvidual rep (e.g. some independents get elected like Jody Wilson-Raybould), versus the party you want to win, versus the Prime Minister you want to win. Typically the latter two are probably nearly perfectly correlated and moot to differentiate, but occassionally people vote against their preferred party because they don't like the leader, plus of course strategic voting. I think most Canadians vote by party, like they do in the U.S., since tribal partisanship is so inmately human, but probably less so in Canada since it is a shorter jump between many more, similar parties. But, it would be interesting (academically speaking) to see how much the other factors, including strategic voting, affect the outcome. Personally I'd like to see it switch to Score voting in each riding, with the winner selected by (1) Condorcet winner by preference based on score order, and (2) if no Condorcet winner then by highest average score. (I won't get into why here; I've written whole articles on that a decade ago and my comment here is already way too long.)

[@xp_studios7804]

LOL last night KZbin recommended me a video of you on Sun News dissing the Canadian political system so this topic was on my mind

[@anonymouslyopinionated656]

JJ Could you do a similar thought experiment using the US & Canada under the 2 different semi-presidential systems? Like France, and one more (Russia/Taiwan)? Or Just France? It would be a nice way to round-out the Presidential v Parliamentary premise of this video..

[@Bpaynee]

Your mentioning it made me realize, you do have very helpful inflection! Love all of your cross border content that helps people imagine other ways of doing things, keep up the great work! ❤️❤️❤️

[@anthonyminimum]

Remember, the only reason the United States has the governmental system it has is because of a debate about State representation 200 years ago, combining the Virginia and New Jersey Plans into the House of Representatives (born from the Virginia Plan) and the Senate (born from the New Jersey Plan)

[@vfsdm]

Congrats on 350k subs and happy burthday JJ 📅

[@MikeApollo1]

What if Turkmenistan and Canada Swapped Political Systems? I think Thats a interesting idea and in my opinion I think canada would certainly benefit from a political system similiar to turkmenistans.

[@thegreypenguin5097]

Ah yes, President 4 Life Justin Trudeau, successor to President 4 Life Pierre Trudeau.

[@isaiahfraser2968]

@@thegreypenguin5097 don’t you mean the dentist

[@Infrared01]

Your username is great

[@ssj3gohan456]

@@thegreypenguin5097 don't forget the pivoting golden statue of Trudeau in Ottawa

[@fugitiveunknown7806]

@@ssj3gohan456 It would be him after the boxing match, for sure. And Trudeau would write books on moose, would own 10,000 moose, and there would be a "Canadian Award in Moose Excellence" that always went to Trudeau.

[@joughnut496]

I could be wrong, as I’m an American having a whole lot more knowledge on America than Canada, but the senate was created by representatives from New Jersey while drafting the U.S. constitution. It was created because they thought that the Virginians’s representatives ideas of representatives based off of the population was unfair to the states with much smaller populations. Giving the territories one senator because of having a much smaller population would be a direct violation of the entire premise of the senate

[@joughnut496]

This is the same basis that our electoral college is based off of. The founding fathers were worried that large population in one area would drown out the voices of a much smaller population in another area, so the fact that a vote in Wyoming counts for more than a vote in California was to protect the-wyomans?-ideals from being drowned out by the ideals of the Californians (replace this tho with the 13 original colonies equivalents)

[@jfdd43]

This video should be used to show how broken the Canadian system is. Imagine having Nancy Paloci selecting your judges, senators… everything without technically having to receive a single vote.

[@RaymondHng]

Most court cases in the United States are handled by state courts and state court system judges are not selected by the federal government. I think same scenario exists for Canadian provincial courts.

[@kappadarwin9476]

After seeing the Republicans did to get three on Justices on the court. I'm fine with Prime Minister Nancy.

[@TFMark]

The point of the Canadian system is to prevent extremism by stacking the senate with people that agree with the government at the time. Over time, this creates a trend that indicates the way the voters prefer in general. If someone was elected that offended the sensibilities of the permanent senators, they could block it. At least until that POV get elected enough times to stack the senate with their supporters and then the trend goes that way. It's to maintain a continuity of stability so no one leader can get away with crazy shit. Non-elected senators also mean they don't get pushed to be extremist themselves as they don't have to worry about challengers. The HOC is for representation, the senate is to prevent instability. The US has two houses that seem to do the same thing (represent) and are kind of redundant as the US senate is definitely not there to provide stability. The US system is much more adversarial between the 3 branches (not internally) and needs to be to work properly, if any part isn't the whole thing breaks down.

[@Matt-yg8ub]

@@kappadarwin9476 And what exactly did they do? Disagree with Obama appointing a partisan hack like Merrick Garland and later approve a middle of the road choirboy, a milktoast fence sitter who votes with the liberals half the time and an exceptionally qualified woman who’s shown no bias or prejudice whatsoever.

[@Matt-yg8ub]

@@TFMark The glaring flaw with the system is that it concentrates the power to purge political opposition into a single individual who wields near dictatorial authority to reshape an unrepresentative government to fit their personal agenda.

[@Thebiggestchief]

8:48 I’m pretty sure Montana has less House members than senators on that map

[@morbidsearch]

I feel like Saskatchewan would use congressional districts in the electoral college. Just because they're Saskatchewan.

[@BrokeTheInterweb]

I was searching for what if we had a parliamentary system in the US, but this overview feels like your branches are all muddied up. The legislative branch bleeds into everything! That’s really fascinating and I’m not sure if id like it

[@mickymikado4240]

This is a great video! Really gives insight into the differences between the two countries. I would love to see a similar video on the similarities and differences between the Canadian and Australian systems too!!