why we are a republic, NOT a democracy

Got to love the way conservatives are always cherry picking quotes from Founding Fathers, as if those men weren't prolific writers and their views on any particular topic are conclusively revealed in one short quote
in order to determine what the intent of any given passage or statement in the constitution or bill of rights is, you go to the quotes and comments of the founders/papers/debates, do you not?

The US is a democratic republic, democratic in the way we elected our representatives and a republic in the way they govern. Democracy isn't mentioned per say in the Constitution because the Constitution is the framework for Government, it establishes the structure of authority
it doesn't mention democracy because the framers despised tyranny of the majority. that's why we are a republic and that the constitution guarantees the states a republican form of government.

None of this has any bearing on the Electoral College, which from its' offset was totally political in nature. Just like the State Legislatures appointing State Senators, it is antiquated, based upon geography rather than people.
If, by political, you mean that all three entities had federal representation, then you'd be correct. congress for the people, senate for the state, and president for the country as a whole.

If California decided next year they wanted to break themselves up into say a dozen new States I'm sure your whole rationale for the Electoral College would change quickly
I don't believe that California has that power via their constitution, but if they did then no, I would not change my rationale. why do you always seem to forget that i'm not a conservative?
 
but won three million more living breathing Americans votes

they only way trump won was Russian fake news and facebook manipulations

so it appears that the democrat base of voters is even more stupid than the conservatives, seeing how even the russians know how our federal elections work better than they do
 
A state with 10 million votes for Senator or governor is not a mob? The founders obviously thought it was since they did not provide for popular vote of Senators.

when the constitution was ratified, senators were chosen by the states legislators..............in other words they were selected by the people as a whole. Democrats turned that in to a popularity contest, or tyranny of the majority.
 
Alexander Hamilton asserted that "We are now forming a Republican form of government. Real liberty is not found in the extremes of democracy, but in moderate governments. If we incline too much to democracy we shall soon shoot into a monarchy, or some other form of a dictatorship". Hamilton, in the last letter he ever wrote, warned that "our real disease is DEMOCRACY."

Thomas Jefferson declared: "A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine."

Benjamin Franklin had similar concerns of a democracy when he warned that “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!” After the Constitutional Convention was concluded, in 1787, a bystander inquired of Franklin: "Well, Doctor, what have we got a Republic or a Monarchy?" Franklin replied, "A Republic, if you can keep it."

John Adams, our second president, wrote: “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself.”

James Madison, the father of the Constitution wrote in Federalist Paper No. 10 that pure democracies “have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”


:dealwithit:

Great post. :clap:
 
Alexander Hamilton asserted that "We are now forming a Republican form of government. Real liberty is not found in the extremes of democracy, but in moderate governments. If we incline too much to democracy we shall soon shoot into a monarchy, or some other form of a dictatorship". Hamilton, in the last letter he ever wrote, warned that "our real disease is DEMOCRACY."

Thomas Jefferson declared: "A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine."

Benjamin Franklin had similar concerns of a democracy when he warned that “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!” After the Constitutional Convention was concluded, in 1787, a bystander inquired of Franklin: "Well, Doctor, what have we got a Republic or a Monarchy?" Franklin replied, "A Republic, if you can keep it."

John Adams, our second president, wrote: “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself.”

James Madison, the father of the Constitution wrote in Federalist Paper No. 10 that pure democracies “have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”

:wellplayed:
 
If Jefferson said it is mob rule when the 51 percent may take away the rights of the 49, what is it when the 49 can take away the rights of the 51? Republicanism?
 
Lots of rightwingers - who have never had a class on ancient Greece, and perhaps never even set foot in a college classroom - hollering about "mob rule" in Greek democracy. It is obviously a talking point, an idea they did not even come up with independently, but they read someone else saying it and thought it sounded good enough to parrot.

Athenian democracy was not static. It evolved. The metaphor of "mob rule" used by modern opponents of democracy originate directly from mistakes the Athenian demos made during the Peloponnesian War, the period of radical democracy - when the structure of Athenian government did have a risk of demagogues holding sway and rash actions being approved.

The Athenians learned from their mistakes, and their democracy evolved in the 4th century to include safeguards to prevent the assembly from taking rash, ill-considered, or unconstitutional actions. They bascially established a judiciary of sorts to vett laws and decisions the Ecclesia made.

My philosophy in general, is that I try to keep my mouth shut on topics I am not knowlegable, educated, or informed about. You would be hard pressed finding me making many posts pontificating about the stock market or federal reserve. I am pretty sure that philosophy is not shared by the vast majority of teabagger posters, and other armchair experts.
 
Lots of rightwingers - who have never had a class on ancient Greece, and perhaps never even set foot in a college classroom - hollering about "mob rule" in Greek democracy. It is obviously a talking point, an idea they did not even come up with independently, but they read someone else saying it and thought it sounded good enough to parrot.

Athenian democracy was not static. It evolved. The metaphor of "mob rule" used by modern opponents of democracy originate directly from mistakes the Athenian demos made during the Peloponnesian War, the period of radical democracy - when the structure of Athenian government did have a risk of demagogues holding sway and rash actions being approved.

The Athenians learned from their mistakes, and their democracy evolved in the 4th century to include safeguards to prevent the assembly from taking rash, ill-considered, or unconstitutional actions. They bascially established a judiciary of sorts to vett laws and decisions the Ecclesia made.

My philosophy in general, is that I try to keep my mouth shut on topics I am not knowlegable, educated, or informed about. You would be hard pressed finding me making many posts pontificating about the stock market or federal reserve. I am pretty sure that philosophy is not shared by the vast majority of teabagger posters, and other armchair experts.

Alexander Hamilton asserted that "We are now forming a Republican form of government. Real liberty is not found in the extremes of democracy, but in moderate governments. If we incline too much to democracy we shall soon shoot into a monarchy, or some other form of a dictatorship". Hamilton, in the last letter he ever wrote, warned that "our real disease is DEMOCRACY."

Thomas Jefferson declared: "A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine."

Benjamin Franklin had similar concerns of a democracy when he warned that “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!” After the Constitutional Convention was concluded, in 1787, a bystander inquired of Franklin: "Well, Doctor, what have we got a Republic or a Monarchy?" Franklin replied, "A Republic, if you can keep it."

John Adams, our second president, wrote: “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself.”

James Madison, the father of the Constitution wrote in Federalist Paper No. 10 that pure democracies “have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”


:dealwithit:

democracy-ui-two-wolves-and-a-sheep-voting-on-whats-31469275.png
 
Hillary Clinton blamed the Electoral College for her stunning defeat in the 2016 presidential election in her latest memoirs, “What Happened.”

Some have claimed that the Electoral College is one of the most dangerous institutions in American politics.

Why? They say the Electoral College system, as opposed to a simple majority vote, distorts the one-person, one-vote principle of democracy because electoral votes are not distributed according to population.

To back up their claim, they point out that the Electoral College gives, for example, Wyoming citizens disproportionate weight in a presidential election.

Put another way, Wyoming, a state with a population of about 600,000, has one member in the House of Representatives and two members in the U.S. Senate, which gives the citizens of Wyoming three electoral votes, or one electoral vote per 200,000 people.

California, our most populous state, has more than 39 million people and 55 electoral votes, or approximately one vote per 715,000 people.

Comparatively, individuals in Wyoming have nearly four times the power in the Electoral College as Californians.

Many people whine that using the Electoral College instead of the popular vote and majority rule is undemocratic. I’d say that they are absolutely right. Not deciding who will be the president by majority rule is not democracy.

But the Founding Fathers went to great lengths to ensure that we were a republic and not a democracy. In fact, the word democracy does not appear in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, or any other of our founding documents.

How about a few quotations expressed by the Founders about democracy?

In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison wanted to prevent rule by majority faction, saying, “Measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.”

John Adams warned in a letter, “Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet, that did not commit suicide.”

Edmund Randolph said, “That in tracing these evils to their origin, every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy.”

Then-Chief Justice John Marshall observed, “Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos.”

The Founders expressed contempt for the tyranny of majority rule, and throughout our Constitution, they placed impediments to that tyranny. Two houses of Congress pose one obstacle to majority rule. That is, 51 senators can block the wishes of 435 representatives and 49 senators.

The president can veto the wishes of 535 members of Congress. It takes two-thirds of both houses of Congress to override a presidential veto.

To change the Constitution requires not a majority but a two-thirds vote of both houses, and if an amendment is approved, it requires ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures.

Finally, the Electoral College is yet another measure that thwarts majority rule. It makes sure that the highly populated states—today, mainly 12 on the east and west coasts, cannot run roughshod over the rest of the nation. That forces a presidential candidate to take into consideration the wishes of the other 38 states.

Those Americans obsessed with rule by popular majorities might want to get rid of the Senate, where states, regardless of population, have two senators.

Should we change representation in the House of Representatives to a system of proportional representation and eliminate the guarantee that each state gets at least one representative?

Currently, seven states with populations of 1 million or fewer have one representative, thus giving them disproportionate influence in Congress.

While we’re at it, should we make all congressional acts by majority rule? When we’re finished with establishing majority rule in Congress, should we then move to change our court system, which requires unanimity in jury decisions, to a simple majority rule?

My question is: Is it ignorance of or contempt for our Constitution that fuels the movement to abolish the Electoral College?




https://www.intellectualtakeout.org/article/why-we-are-republic-not-democracy

Whose ignorance? The Repubs were for abolishing it until they found it helped them. The E.C. was designed to give more power to slave states so they would join the union. It incidentally gave more power to agricultural states because slavery was used mostly on farms.
There is also an argument that the founders did not want the vote of the people to decide elections because they were not educated enough to understand the government. They wanted the wealthy and powerful to have the last say. It is so elitist.
Those days are long gone.
 
Whose ignorance? The Repubs were for abolishing it until they found it helped them. The E.C. was designed to give more power to slave states so they would join the union. It incidentally gave more power to agricultural states because slavery was used mostly on farms.
There is also an argument that the founders did not want the vote of the people to decide elections because they were not educated enough to understand the government. They wanted the wealthy and powerful to have the last say. It is so elitist.
Those days are long gone.

"...The Repubs were for abolishing it until they found it helped them..."

And of course you have numerous articles supporting this, right!!


:facepalm:
 
Lots of rightwingers - who have never had a class on ancient Greece, and perhaps never even set foot in a college classroom - hollering about "mob rule" in Greek democracy. It is obviously a talking point, an idea they did not even come up with independently, but they read someone else saying it and thought it sounded good enough to parrot.

Athenian democracy was not static. It evolved. The metaphor of "mob rule" used by modern opponents of democracy originate directly from mistakes the Athenian demos made during the Peloponnesian War, the period of radical democracy - when the structure of Athenian government did have a risk of demagogues holding sway and rash actions being approved.

The Athenians learned from their mistakes, and their democracy evolved in the 4th century to include safeguards to prevent the assembly from taking rash, ill-considered, or unconstitutional actions. They bascially established a judiciary of sorts to vett laws and decisions the Ecclesia made.

My philosophy in general, is that I try to keep my mouth shut on topics I am not knowlegable, educated, or informed about. You would be hard pressed finding me making many posts pontificating about the stock market or federal reserve. I am pretty sure that philosophy is not shared by the vast majority of teabagger posters, and other armchair experts.

and their answer to this would be


Books and learnin are elitists evil tools


this is exactly why they demonize any attempt to have intelligent informed discussions


they know the facts will destroy their twisted claims


that is why they target the poorly educated by making fox be full of pretty young women who parrot the republican designed talking points and to flirt with the AVERAGE looking men they hire

its designed to appeal to people who hate book learnin and think anyone who tries to be involved in an intelligent discussion is "just showing off their smarts and nit really talking FACTS"


average low earning smucks who think their postion of being on the winning team in America and its being STOLEN by all this inferior teams.


sportos who see everything as a football game

Fox is their TEAM


white boys is their TEAM


BOYS


nit women

they are just supposed to look hot and agree with the Average looking white boys while they flirt with them


andnthe women whpn watch fox have been taught all their lives to stand BY their man


let him LEAD them


because they are side piece and not leaders
 
Back
Top