Desribe the strengths and weakness of the Presidential system of government in the United States when compared to the Parliamentary system used in countries like the United Kingdom. Do you believe the Presidential system of the United States ultimately helps or hinders how your political ideology achieves its stated goals.
In America, the president is blamed for every little thing. Yet it is still more likely that an incumbent will be re-elected. The president is also beholden to campaign contributors who helped get him elected. The other problem with our presidency is that second term presidents are soon considered worthless lame ducks, with everyone just waiting for the next president, while first term presidents have to spend vital time and energy on re-election campaigns while in office.
Regarding post #2 above, I agree with you to an extent. With that being said, some would argue that what you consider a weakness was an inherent strength designed by the framers of the Constitution. The "gridlock" you speak of, while often times inconvenient, prevents sudden, wide sweeping changes that can take away the rights of citizens in the blink of an eye.
The main weakness of the presidential system is that the president does not necessarily have control of Congress. For that matter, neither party necessarily controls Congress. That can lead to the sort of gridlock that we have now where the President and the Senate are "controlled" by the Democrats and the Republicans have the House. That could never happen in the British system.