Is the US a democracy ? Should it be ?

I think after reading a post from Mott in another post, it might be a good idea to have a thread to discuss the subject line.

I know the usual chatter about inflation, immigration and reproduction management (abortion isn't part of my vocabulary right now) will probably help fill this thread.
But let's try to keep the discussion to the subject line.

Have at it !!!!

@mghrn55 said
I think after reading a post from Mott in another post, it might be a good idea to have a thread to discuss the subject line.

I know the usual chatter about inflation, immigration and reproduction management (abortion isn't part of my vocabulary right now) will probably help fill this thread.
But let's try to keep the discussion to the subject line.

Have at it !!!!

Stupid question, and the framers didn’t think it should be. what anyone thinks NOW is irrelevant.

@mghrn55 said
I think after reading a post from Mott in another post, it might be a good idea to have a thread to discuss the subject line.

I know the usual chatter about inflation, immigration and reproduction management (abortion isn't part of my vocabulary right now) will probably help fill this thread.
But let's try to keep the discussion to the subject line.

Have at it !!!!

Define democracy?

I have a feeling MG is about to violate his own rule. I have asked this question for months, no one responds. Now, I guess,,,,,,he will HAVE to?

@averagejoe1 said
I have a feeling MG is about to violate his own rule. I have asked this question for months, no one responds. Now, I guess,,,,,,he will HAVE to?

And you’ve been given the answer an uncountable number of times but for some reason you think the answer to such a simple question eludes you.
The only rational answer is that you know exactly what democracy is, you just don’t like the idea that you do not have more political weight than other people by virtue of your white right wing Republican skin.

‘Universal suffrage where everyone’s vote is counted equally’
How could something be any simpler?
I’ve noticed you never debate or challenge the definitions you get, you simply ignore the answers and lie about not receiving them.

@mghrn55 said
I think after reading a post from Mott in another post, it might be a good idea to have a thread to discuss the subject line.

I know the usual chatter about inflation, immigration and reproduction management (abortion isn't part of my vocabulary right now) will probably help fill this thread.
But let's try to keep the discussion to the subject line.

Have at it !!!!

Yes, yes

@kevcvs57 said
And you’ve been given the answer an uncountable number of times but for some reason you think the answer to such a simple question eludes you.
The only rational answer is that you know exactly what democracy is, you just don’t like the idea that you do not have more political weight than other people by virtue of your white right wing Republican skin.

‘Universal suffrag ...[text shortened]... r challenge the definitions you get, you simply ignore the answers and lie about not receiving them.

Thankyou. Finally. Sonhouse was chicken. You are brave. Thankyou.
I will take you at your word on the definition. I would like a true discussion, if we may. "Everyone's vote is counted equally'.

#1. Right now, the Electoral College (EC) insures that all parts of the country are involved in selecting a president

If the election depended solely on the popular vote, which you suggest, then candidates could limit campaigning to heavily-populated areas or specific regions. To win the election, presidential candidates need electoral votes from multiple regions and therefore they build campaign platforms with a national focus, meaning that the winner will actually be serving the needs of the entire country.

Without the electoral college, groups such as Iowa farmers and Ohio factory workers would be ignored in favor of pandering to metropolitan areas with higher population densities, leaving rural areas and small towns marginalized.

So, what is your position on this time-worn position? Next, we will look at a very important fact,,,,,that, the EC protects the voices of the minority from being overwhelmed by the will of the majority....51% could control 49%. A bit strong, dont you think?

@averagejoe1 said
Thankyou. Finally. Sonhouse was chicken. You are brave. Thankyou.
I will take you at your word on the definition. I would like a true discussion, if we may. "Everyone's vote is counted equally'.

#1. Right now, the Electoral College (EC) insures that all parts of the country are involved in selecting a president

If the election depended solely on the popu ...[text shortened]... ng overwhelmed by the will of the majority....51% could control 49%. A bit strong, dont you think?

No, it doesn't. Campaigns concentrate on a few large "swing" States and basically ignore the rest except for fund raising events. Making every vote count equally would have the effect of encouraging national platforms which is the opposite of what the EC does.

BTW, "demo" means "the People" and "cracy"
means "rule" both in Greek. Thus, democracy means "rule by the People" something right wingers have always opposed.

@mghrn55 said
I think after reading a post from Mott in another post, it might be a good idea to have a thread to discuss the subject line.

I know the usual chatter about inflation, immigration and reproduction management (abortion isn't part of my vocabulary right now) will probably help fill this thread.
But let's try to keep the discussion to the subject line.

Have at it !!!!

America was and is the great experiment in government by consent of the governed. How that consent is tallied, at local, state, and federal levels, is a little confusing, but in principle America is a representative republic in which sovereign power is vested in the electorate (not, for example, vested in a monarch, as in the UK).

Should it be? Yes. It is not perfect, of course; no form of government is. Those who don't like it are free to leave, and that is one of the big differences between a free people and the people of No. Korea (for example).

@averagejoe1 said
Define democracy?

Democracy is majority rule, one man one vote:
It's no better than three wolves and a sheep voting on who to eat for lunch.
(Courtesy of Sir Winston Churchill)

@no1marauder said
BTW, "demo" means "the People" and "cracy"
means "rule" both in Greek. Thus, democracy means "rule by the People" something right wingers have always opposed.

And for good reason.
In 1850's America, rule by the people meant slavery was OK, and it took the Republicans to stop it.

@jj-adams said
And for good reason.
In 1850's America, rule by the people meant slavery was OK, and it took the Republicans to stop it.

No it didn't. Your history sucks.

The majority had already abolished slavery in most States. The only thing saving slavery was antidemocratic provisions in the Constitution.

Present day Republicans would have fought to maintain slavery not wished for its abolition.

@mott-the-hoople said
Stupid question, and the framers didn’t think it should be. what anyone thinks NOW is irrelevant.

Perhaps I'll simplify the issue for you.
If the US is not a democracy, then how do you propose who to put in the White House in 2024 ?
Can you answer that ?

@mott-the-hoople said
Stupid question, and the framers didn’t think it should be. what anyone thinks NOW is irrelevant.

wow what a moron

What people think NOW is the only thing relevant. That's how humans progress, by finding better ways to do things NOW than previous generations.

The framers thought slavery is not worth getting worked up about. The framers didn't think women should have a say in governing. The framers thought natives should just make hurry up and die so they could move onto their land.

I don't give a fuk what a bunch of hypocritical white slavers thought.

@zahlanzi said
wow what a moron

What people think NOW is the only thing relevant. That's how humans progress, by finding better ways to do things NOW than previous generations.

The framers thought slavery is not worth getting worked up about. The framers didn't think women should have a say in governing. The framers thought natives should just make hurry up and die so they could move onto their land.

I don't give a fuk what a bunch of hypocritical white slavers thought.

By 1787, most in the US opposed slavery. The Congress, meeting at the same time as the Constitutional Convention, abolished it forever in the Northwest Territories.

It's true no serious attempt to end it was made at the Constitutional Convention, because this would have split the country. But it is a myth that slavery was popular at this time; most States had already or would soon ban it.