Well we were talking about Ireland initially. Where the head of state is a ceremonial role with no real power. Who is voted for every 7 years by the public. Do I think that is better than having a ceremonial head of state that is born in to the position then yes I do.
And just for a moment step back and reflect on the question you just asked an Irish person. Would you like to be ruled by the Brits again? What kind of answer were you expecting? If I gave you a comprehensive answer I'd have been banned.
What do you do if the member of the royal family who happens to win the family lottery and is head of your country is an absolute wrongun. Can you vote them out? No.
And there's been plenty of wronguns throughout the years.
Just to add, we don't even have to be part of the same state as ye for the idiotic decisions of yer leaders to to still impact us. All I have to do is look about 500km up the road to see it in action.
You're right, we can't vote them out. But we at least have a good idea of who is going to be the head of state, and they're at least not as bad as whom and what we've been electing and voting for in recent years. I stated that your system may be good with your set of voters, and you said that your system should be good with our set of voters too, which I disagree with. You're describing something that you're happy with since you have your given electorate, which is the key to making your system work. You said that it wouldn't make any difference with our electorate either.
So I posited a situation where both of us could experience your system, as you've suggested, with your and our electorates combined. And predictably, you're happy for our voters to vote for a president that you don't have to experience.
Nope, I'm not particularly enthusiastic about royals being ceremonial head of state. But I'd rather have the ones closest in line than the prospect of President Johnson or Frottage.