You know what is a threat to democracy?

[Libhater]

Are you claiming that the United States is a democracy?

No, in fact, I'm always telling folks here that America is not a democracy, rather, that it's a Constitutional Republic.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

"They" who? He eventually decided to quit when it the money stopped coming in from the biggest donors.. Nobody forced him out.

sure......the Lord Almighty did it.........

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Funny thing about that almost universally believed thing you believe exists. It would appear facts trump your belief that something is universally believed.

Opinion | Don’t Take Trump’s Word for It. Check the Data.

Don’t Take Trump’s Word for It. Check the Data.

www.nytimes.com

and yet what percentage of people in the US say they were better off under Trump than they are under Biden.........fuck the opinion of the lib'rul rag you quoted......

 

[Nordberg]

No, in fact, I'm always telling folks here that America is not a democracy, rather, that it's a Constitutional Republic.

In fact, if you check the lists of world democracies, you will see America listed. Every election in America at all levels, from dog catcher to Senator, is won by getting the most votes. There is one exception. There have been a few efforts to make that one popular vote too. But since the Repubs win the presidency with fewer votes, they are fighting to keep it the same.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

In fact, if you check the lists of world democracies, you will see America listed. Every election in America at all levels, from dog catcher to Senator, is won by getting the most votes. There is one exception. There have been a few efforts to make that one popular vote too. But since the Repubs win the presidency with fewer votes, they are fighting to keep it the same.

It used to be Senators were selected by state legislatures or governors to represent their state. That changed with the 17th amendment, and the Senate became nothing more than another House just with longer terms. That was bad for the US.

Selecting a President by simple popular vote will likewise be bad for the US because it means the entire federal government is now run on a populist basis and nothing else. States have no say. Rural and low population density areas get cut out of the picture as the federal government runs on one-size-fits-all policies that are often detrimental or outright destructive to one part of the nation or another.

 

[Nordberg]

It used to be Senators were selected by state legislatures or governors to represent their state. That changed with the 17th amendment, and the Senate became nothing more than another House just with longer terms. That was bad for the US.

Selecting a President by simple popular vote will likewise be bad for the US because it means the entire federal government is now run on a populist basis and nothing else. States have no say. Rural and low population density areas get cut out of the picture as the federal government runs on one-size-fits-all policies that are often detrimental or outright destructive to one part of the nation or another.

It makes sense to you that a person with fewer votes should be the winner? OK. If that is called thinking, have at it. There is something fundamentally wrong that the person with fewer votes gets to win.
The electoral college was a device to appease the slave states. How many slave states do we have now? It was carved out to "unite " the states. A new state is vulnerable to the established world powers. They could not be fighting each other and defend attacks from the Brits.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

It makes sense to you that a person with fewer votes should be the winner? OK. If that is called thinking, have at it. There is something fundamentally wrong that the person with fewer votes gets to win.
The electoral college was a device to appease the slave states. How many slave states do we have now? It was carved out to "unite " the states. A new state is vulnerable to the established world powers. They could not be fighting each other and defend attacks from the Brits.

It makes sense to me that more than just "The People" are represented at the federal level. The system the US had originally set up for a federal government took into account the individual states and their diverse populations and needs. A simple popular vote system wouldn't do that. It favors just the highest population urban areas and states over everything else.

That hasn't changed today one iota. Maybe the issue isn't slavery now, but there are other issues, plenty of them, where decisions from Washington don't work well or at all for some parts of the US while they do for others. That's the problem with a central government with lots of power and voted in on nothing but a popular vote.

 

[Hume]

It used to be Senators were selected by state legislatures or governors to represent their state. That changed with the 17th amendment, and the Senate became nothing more than another House just with longer terms. That was bad for the US.

How is denying residents of a state representation a good thing, by giving authority to state legislators?

 

[T. A. Gardner]

How is denying residents of a state representation a good thing, by giving authority to state legislators?

It doesn't. Senators were intended to represent their STATE in the US government. That is, the state legislators and governor voted into office by the state's people, chose two senators to represent them, the state government duly elected, in Washington.

How does sending X number of state representatives to the House voted in by popular vote, and then voting in two more representatives to the Senate by the same means add any good to the state? Who represents the state and the state's interests in Washington?

 

[NiftyNiblick]

Ignoring the election at presidential primaries and having donors decide on the presidential candidate.

I've always said that the primaries--especially the open ones--were complete horseshit.
Party leaders should choose their party's candidate at the convention as in the old days.

The primaries chose a candidate who's decided not to run.
Of course low-life Republicans would prefer to deny the other major party the right to put forth another candidate.
Republicans are morally and intellectually deficient people.
It's impossible for quality people to respect them.
So they don't.

 

[Goyboy]

At this point in the process, it would be virtually impossible to have another primary to allow the voters to pick somebody who can actually do the job.

The DemonRats did this by lying to the world.

 

[ZenMode]

The DemonRats did this by lying to the world.

They had a guy that was clearly resistant to resigning the nomination and there's no way they were going to go "25th amendment" on him. They had to try to manage it.

 

[Into the Night]

Democracy in America is long gone....we became the Soviet Union but more Evil....and we are going down....this son of a bitch is going down.

The United States was never a democracy, Chicom. It is not the USSR or Evil either.

 

[Into the Night]

You should stop watching Mark Levin.

?? Mark Levin never made any such statement, Void. STOP WORD STUFFING!

 

[Into the Night]

sure.....he had to step down voluntarily........which he did........which he did because the party leaders gave him no choice........which they ought to have done before the primaries even started since every single one of them knew he was incapacitated but covered up for that year......you have two possible choices.......either they planned to keep him on until after the election or they were the dumbest mother fuckers on the planet.............

Getting rid of Biden didn't help them. They are still the dumbest fuckers on the planet.

 

[Into the Night]

The party leaders can't reasonably force him out If he didn't want to leave.

Yes they can.

He had already won the nomination for 2024.

Irrelevant in the Democrat party.

Sure, they could invoke the 25th Amendment,

Who are 'they'?

send the entire party into chaos

The Democrats are already in chaos. It's their own making.

and most certainly guarantee a win for Trump.

That's already most certainly guaranteed.

They decided to play it safe and try to baby him through the finish line. It didn't work because of his very public failure in the debate. If not for that, who knows where we would be right now.

The writing was on the wall when the polling flipped to Trump leading in nearly every swing state and the large money donors started panicking and holding back campaign donations.

Not everything is a grand conspiracy.

The Democrat party is a conspiracy.

 

[Into the Night]

"They" who? He eventually decided to quit when it the money stopped coming in from the biggest donors.. Nobody forced him out.

Paradox. Irrational. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox, Void.

 

[Into the Night]

No, in fact, I'm always telling folks here that America is not a democracy, rather, that it's a Constitutional Republic.

A 'Constitutional' republic is redundant. A republic is already government by law (a constitution).
A 'Constitutional republic' is like saying a constitutional constitutional form of government.

Just 'republic' is fine.

 

[ZenMode]

Yes they can.

Irrelevant in the Democrat party.

Who are 'they'?

The Democrats are already in chaos. It's their own making.

That's already most certainly guaranteed.


The Democrat party is a conspiracy.

"Yes they can."

No, they can't. At least not before the conversation and only if those who pledged to Biden can unpledge.

 

[Into the Night]

In fact, if you check the lists of world democracies,

There are currently no democracies anywhere in the world.

you will see America listed.

The United States is not and never was a democracy.

Every election in America at all levels, from dog catcher to Senator, is won by getting the most votes.

A democracy has no representatives.

There is one exception. There have been a few efforts to make that one popular vote too. But since the Repubs win the presidency with fewer votes, they are fighting to keep it the same.

A democracy has no representatives and no constitution.

DON'T TRY TO RELABEL THE OLIGACHY YOU WANT AS A "DEMOCRACY", SYBIL!