Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When you look at the latest congressional races, we see the overwhelming majority of land in America is home to Republicans or Conservatives. A very small percentage of the land mass is Democrat or Liberal. Democrats and Liberals can and often do control things nationally, as the highest population areas are mainly in the BLUE areas.
What this has brought us in this country is basically a bifurcated country. It's very simple to understand.
The needs, wants and requirements for the RED areas are not at all the same as the BLUE areas.
The needs, wants and requirements for the BLUE areas are not at all the same as the RED areas.
There is no workable one sized solution for the country, even though the left continues to try to force it down everyone's throats.
Both sides are so far apart at this point and those on the left in positions of power will not stop demonizing those on the right, there simply is no path forward anymore.
We are two completely different countries located within the same borders. We have almost nothing in common. We think differently and at this point, have no respect for each other.
It's over folks. Stick a fork in America. The dream is dead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephan A Smith
It would be great if DeSantis wins, but he won't. Trump will ensure he destroys the chances of Republicans winning.
Even if he won, the issue still remains we are a completely divided country. We have two groups of people who have nothing in common with the other. We simply do not want the same things and are totally against what the other is for.
It's no longer workable.
Horsefeathers. You don't seem to understand America and our government of the people, by the people, for the people; nor exhibit any respect or knowledge of the history and foundational pillars of our constitutional democratic republic that you inaccurately declare not workable & dead.
Here is what I hear when I read your posts, not only the above, but your numerous others across this forum: "If Republicans don't win elections in America, then democracy is a fraud so why should we bother with democracy at all if it produces the 'wrong results'?"
Yous, IMO, is the kind of thinking that leads to political violence such as what we encountered on Jan 6 and is just more of the MAGA movement’s growing hostility toward democracy and its anti-American lean into autocracy.
A very disturbing drumbeat you continually choose. One which is an imminent threat to ALL Americans, no matter their political persuasion, not to mention the danger it presents to our 246-year-old great American experiment that you have clearly already abandoned and deemed worthless. If you are an American, then I do feel sad for you and your sorry hopelessness toward our nation and her people. Whom I might add, have far more in common than that which divides us.
Peace.
Last edited by corpgypsy; 12-02-2022 at 12:19 PM..
Yeah I'm definitely not opposing any of that. I definitely favor reform of the EC for electing the president- which is a federal and not a state-related position. I also very much like the republic form of government of federated states, and I'm very down to keep that. The US is both a republic and a democracy, and that's apparently a fact too complicated for some of the shining intellectuals in this thread to handle. There's an interplay of multiple concepts going on there, just like almost any other country you can point to in the world.
We do vote for the president, you know. That's this thing called, "democracy".
Discussions are made in context.
If I am talking to someone in communist China and they say the US is a democracy, I just say "yes, that is true".
Talking to someone in Switzerland where they have direct democracy, and they say the US is also a democracy, I am goign to say, "No, we are a Republic. We are a representive Constitutional democracy".
I do not agree with your opinion that the folks opposing you on this thread are unaware that America is a democracy, and has a form of democratic government. You are talking generally. They are talking, within the context of the the discussion that was brought up about the Electoral College. I don't think anybody was making a bid deal about Republic vs Democracy before that. I could be wrong.
If I am talking to someone in communist China and they say the US is a democracy, I just say "yes, that is true".
Talking to someone in Switzerland where they have direct democracy, and they say the US is also a democracy, I am goign to say, "No, we are a Republic. We are a representive Constitutional democracy".
I do not agree with your opinion that the folks opposing you on this thread are unaware that America is a democracy, and has a form of democratic government. You are talking generally. They are talking, within the context of the the discussion that was brought up about the Electoral College. I don't think anybody was making a bid deal about Republic vs Democracy before that. I could be wrong.
Hey, I'm glad that at least one conservative person understands the concept. Congrats. The US is a democracy, like all the other modern western liberal democracies. It is also a constitutional republic.
Here was the exchange a few pages ago, for reference:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephan A Smith
WE ARE NOT A DEMOCRACY!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by primaltech
We are indeed a democracy. And a republic. We're both a constitutional federal republic, and a representative democracy. The founders set it up that way. The whole relationship and dynamic between those elements is what makes our country work pretty well, and why we've enjoyed a great stability for most of our history. We embrace the concept of democracy (as opposed to monarchy or autocracy), yet we also place limits on it, via the constitution, and the ideals of individual rights and freedoms, and an air of tolerance and plurality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephan A Smith
A country is either a Democracy or it isn't.
The United States is NOT a Democracy and it was designed that way for a very good reason.
Quote:
Originally Posted by primaltech
Yeah, and the US is one. It is both a republic, and also a representative democracy. Just like the UK is both a monarchy and a parliamentary democracy. Anyone with half a brain knows that these are not concepts that are in conflict. We're a liberal democratic republic. Just like all of the western and first world countries are either that, or a democratic figurehead type monarchy/commonwealth nation (Canada, Australia, etc.).
I guess you're apparently opposed to democracy. Okay, well the alternative is way worse. That's why the colonies fought a revolution, and founded the United States, specifically as the world's first modern democracy. Because the alternative to that democracy was the tyrannical, centralized, hereditary rule by whim, from afar. Democracy embraced the bold new idea of the government serving the common man.
The founders opposed unchecked democracy, pure democracy, and direct democracy. They clearly didn't oppose democracy in general. They voted democratically to elect their government representatives, same as we still do now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephan A Smith
A Representative Democracy nor a Constitutional Federal Republic is a Democracy.
A Democracy is a Democracy.
The United States implements "some" similar protocols as a Democracy, but is not a Democracy itself.
There is a major difference.
Basic 101 facts, which the majority of people are totally ignorant to.
It's why you see so many people complaining about the fact we don't elect Presidents in simple majority popular vote fashion. THEY ARE CLUELESS!
Quote:
Originally Posted by primaltech
So I guess in your bizarre world, no democracies exist, in all the world? Since they all also have some elements other than pure and direct and unlimited democracy? That's... uh, ridiculous.
We are getting to the heart of who wants to banish the Electoral College and elect the president by a popular vote, rather than having "Electors" as required by the US Constitution.
Those of us who want to keep the Electoral College are trying to underscore the Republican form of government our Founders wisely gave to us.
Those who want to banish the Electoral College are calling us a Democracy, i.e. - a direct vote for the POTUS, completely circuventing the states in the process. The building blocks of the nation are the states, not the people. It requires a constitutional amendment to make that change to the US constitution.
This is being pushed by those calling us a "Democracy", rather than acknowledging our Republican form of government.
I haven’t seen “banish the Electoral College” in either party’s platform. No one is pushing to eliminate the EC. No one is pushing a direct vote. There are some who would like to take the selection of electors completely out of the hands of voters and leave it up to the Governor or state legislature. That would truly be anti-democratic and I oppose it.
I haven’t seen “banish the Electoral College” in either party’s platform. No one is pushing to eliminate the EC. No one is pushing a direct vote. There are some who would like to take the selection of electors completely out of the hands of voters and leave it up to the Governor or state legislature. That would truly be anti-democratic and I oppose it.
You may want to read the posts in this very thread. MULTIPLE people are calling for the end of the EC.
The main thing is I think we should try to never again have a situation where the EC outcome doesn't match the vote outcome, like in 2016 and 2000. It's happened I think 5 times total, but the chances of it seems to be increasing.
If reforming the EC could accomplish that while still keeping it in place, then that works just as well to me.
Also the other main thing is the effect on campaigning, and discouraging much of the populace to bother to vote. Any candidate should be able to pick up some electoral votes in any state, even if they don't win a majority in that state. The winner takes all part of it is the main issue.
The main thing is I think we should try to never again have a situation where the EC outcome doesn't match the vote outcome, like in 2016 and 2000. It's happened I think 5 times total, but the chances of it seems to be increasing.
If reforming the EC could accomplish that while still keeping it in place, then that works just as well to me.
Also the other main thing is the effect on campaigning, and discouraging much of the populace to bother to vote. Any candidate should be able to pick up some electoral votes in any state, even if they don't win a majority in that state. The winner takes all part of it is the main issue.
The popular vote doesn't have to match the EC, THAT'S THE POINT OF THE EC.
When are people going to learn about the history of how our country came to be and the reasons why it was designed the way it is?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
