27 Sep 22
@no1marauder said
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.
27 Sep 22
@averagejoe1 saidSo Marauder, with his usual etymology and floaty phrasing has weighed in, but I am still awaiting a straight 'non floaty' answer from Kev, straight from the hip.
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?
Let us see what Kev says about this practical question, which does not have phrases like 'swing states' used by Marauder. It is a plan and simple question.
Then we will ask him if 51% should be able to dictate to the other 49%. Does Anyone feel OK with that? If that has summarily been OK here and there, where in the world did the 66% rule ever come from, and why?n Had to be a reason. Could it be to avoid having the majority tell everyone else what to do? Is this what it means to be a liberal ?
27 Sep 22
@no1marauder said"not getting worked up about it" in no way implied it was popular. It was allowed to continue, profit was made over it and it played a big role in the development of the US.
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.
"It's true no serious attempt to end it was made at the Constitutional Convention, because this would have split the country."
Cool fact bro. What does this have to do with my comment that the founders were hypocritical white slavers that we shouldn't give a fuk about what they thought 200+years after? Maybe you meant to reinforce it.
"But it is a myth that slavery was popular at this time; most States had already or would soon ban it."
Good thing nobody suggested it.
27 Sep 22
@averagejoe1 said" Then we will ask him if 51% should be able to dictate to the other 49%. "
So Marauder, with his usual etymology and floaty phrasing has weighed in, but I am still awaiting a straight 'non floaty' answer from Kev, straight from the hip.
Let us see what Kev says about this practical question, which does not have phrases like 'swing states' used by Marauder. It is a plan and simple question.
Then we will ask him if 51% should be able t ...[text shortened]... to avoid having the majority tell everyone else what to do? Is this what it means to be a liberal ?
Yes.
"Does Anyone feel OK with that? "
All democracies.
"Could it be to avoid having the majority tell everyone else what to do?"
Dictatorships also avoid having the majority telling everyone what to do. Also monarchies.
By your inane logic, if a group of 5 people want to go out to eat and they have a vote, Karen and Bob should be allowed to nominate the restaurant everytime simply because they live on the outskirts of town. Or fillibuster choosing a restaurant indefinitely. 3 people, the majority, should just do whatever Karen and Bob want or do nothing at all because Karen and Bob are so damn special.
27 Sep 22
@zahlanzi saidNot a fair analogy. You have to say 100 people going to dinner, and 51 of them get to tell the other 49 where to go. The 49 have no voice. I thought you were for fairness and equality.
" Then we will ask him if 51% should be able to dictate to the other 49%. "
Yes.
"Does Anyone feel OK with that? "
All democracies.
"Could it be to avoid having the majority tell everyone else what to do?"
Dictatorships also avoid having the majority telling everyone what to do. Also monarchies.
By your inane logic, if a group of 5 people want to go out to eat ...[text shortened]... just do whatever Karen and Bob want or do nothing at all because Karen and Bob are so damn special.
Anyway, rewrite it with 100 people. The '3' people you reference represent Sixty Per Cent. Slanthead. And, 60% would be reasonable.
@mghrn55 saidIf every voter gets their votes counted is that a democracy?
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 !!!!
Just because everybody gets a vote does not mean they are not being coerced into voting for 2 candidates the wealthy wants you to. When you watch the news 3rd party candidates are ignored so you don't vote for them. 3rd party candidates are excluded from the debates. Your choices are selected for you by the corporate news media. How is that any different than Iran selecting candidates you are allowed to vote for?
US democracy is about as legitimate as Iran's democracy.
@mghrn55 saidYea. The US is a form of democracy.
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 !!!!
27 Sep 22
@metal-brain saidNone of that diminishes the definition of democracy.
If every voter gets their votes counted is that a democracy?
Just because everybody gets a vote does not mean they are not being coerced into voting for 2 candidates the wealthy wants you to. When you watch the news 3rd party candidates are ignored so you don't vote for them. 3rd party candidates are excluded from the debates. Your choices are selected for you by the c ...[text shortened]... candidates you are allowed to vote for?
US democracy is about as legitimate as Iran's democracy.
My God, wat a gorgeous sentence to say out loud, by the way.
@metal-brain saidThe other thing driving the 2 party see-saw is that the biggest motivator driving people to the polls is not to vote for something, but to vote something out. Then it becomes a vote for who is likely to have the most effect of getting 'X' out.
If every voter gets their votes counted is that a democracy?
Just because everybody gets a vote does not mean they are not being coerced into voting for 2 candidates the wealthy wants you to. When you watch the news 3rd party candidates are ignored so you don't vote for them. 3rd party candidates are excluded from the debates. Your choices are selected for you by the c ...[text shortened]... candidates you are allowed to vote for?
US democracy is about as legitimate as Iran's democracy.
Unfortunately this will have a large effect on NZ's next election, there's such a hate on horse face goofy that all National have to do is STFU and they're in, when actually they're just another shade of what's there now.
27 Sep 22
@shavixmir saidSo Iran is a democracy then?
None of that diminishes the definition of democracy.
My God, wat a gorgeous sentence to say out loud, by the way.
27 Sep 22
@wajoma saidDo you have an opinion on this?
The other thing driving the 2 party see-saw is that the biggest motivator driving people to the polls is not to vote for something, but to vote something out. Then it becomes a vote for who is likely to have the most effect of getting 'X' out.
Unfortunately this will have a large effect on NZ's next election, there's such a hate on horse face goofy that all National have to do is STFU and they're in, when actually they're just another shade of what's there now.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/new-zealand-prime-minister-calls-global-censorship-system
Do the people over there support that?
27 Sep 22
@metal-brain saidWell, no.
So Iran is a democracy then?
What the hell makes you ask that?
Iran is an Islamic theocracy.
And while there is some semblance of a presidential system, they have an autocratic hierarchy which gives the actual leader more power than elected officials.
27 Sep 22
@shavixmir saidBecause the USA and Iran both control who you don't vote for, they just have different methods of achieving that. Iran overtly prevents certain candidates from running. The USA is just more covert about it. They ignore candidates in the news media so you don't vote for them.
Well, no.
What the hell makes you ask that?
Iran is an Islamic theocracy.
And while there is some semblance of a presidential system, they have an autocratic hierarchy which gives the actual leader more power than elected officials.
The result is the same.
@jj-adams saidThat is why there is a Constitution and a Bill of Rights limiting what the majority may do. If 95% of Americans were to vote to re-instate slavery, for example, the Constitution would bar this.
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)