Except when it is responsible for ending a working democracy. Millions of voters recognized the threat of an incompetent and dangerously disturbed narcissist but that collective wisdom was overturned by a system designed to protect the revenues of slave owners two centuries ago.
2 Likes
It didnât end a working democracy, nor was it to protect slave owners.
Here is just one of many statements about the threat to American democracy:
What we are experiencing is a mirror image of what the electoral college supporters claim to be the reason to keep it, instead of tyrannical rule by a a majority of voters we have suffered it by way of a majority of electors.
Why do you think there is such great antipathy toward voting by as many citizens as possible? Why do you think voter suppression has become the byword of the republican party? Why are they afraid of American citizens voting?
Only tyrants and dictators fear the voice of the nationâs citizens. That is why they work so hard to silence those voices and cast doubt on its message.
3 Likes
Interesting article, read the last part about George Wills comment. There is a reason we have kept it the last few centuries, some may disagree, I donât. Just vote
I see it as responsible for maintaining a working democracy. Without the electoral system or other check on a pure democracy, the president would be elected by the residents of the largest cities in the most populous States which comprise over 50% of the countryâs population. The same ones who can be counted on a majority to vote democrat. The democratic party would be guaranteed to never lose an election again so there would be no point in a 2 party system. As much as you despise republicans, do you think you would be better off living under an unopposed dictatorship under the guise of âdemocracyâ?
1 Like
So that is what you see as a problem, itâs kind of like not having a tortoise blocking all legislation?
You are right about the 2 party system though, its time has passed. We need to dump it along with the electoral college and have true representation of and by voters, a parliament perhaps along with an end to financing of candidates by people and corporations who are not entitled to vote for them.
My point is that urban centers vote for what is best for them and not for what is best for the nation as a whole.
1 Like
Oh, you mean that 80+ percent of the population would have more power than the other 20- percent? Sounds like democracy to me, when 80 percent of the population vote for or against something why should the other 20 percent claim itâs unfair?
Why does one party fear the growing number of people who live in urban America?
The repubs have no issue with denying anyone the right to vote in the Senate, the tortoise simply says no, you cannot vote ⌠funny how selective this argument against giving people a voice or a right to vote works for some.
2 Likes
Itâs not 80%, only a majority by a margin. If the flyover States have no say in the process, whatâs to keep them from seceding so they can look after their interests. Shouldnât our goal be to keep the nation united?
Wow. The Electoral College has one purpose, and one purpose only. To rubber stamp the popular vote. In assertions to the contrary are the grossest kind of intellectual dishonesty and any other result is an abject failure of the system.
The College had another purpose in the past. To help glue 13 colonies together and form a constitution. Now, it only encourages gamesmanship like gerrymandering and voter suppression.
1 Like
It is no longer a ârubber stampâ and there is no law that says the electors must follow the popular vote.
Clearly, itâs not currently fulfilling its purpose in life.
That 80 percent was the urban population according to the 2010 census. You stated that âurban centers vote for what is best for them and not for what is best for the nation as a wholeâ so that must mean you believe every urban center opposes your tribe.
Is that why Trump is working so hard to suppress voting and to distort the census?
You canât have it both ways, do you want votes to count or are you willing to settle for whomever or whatever a single senator wants on a given day depending on who pays him or contributes the most to his campaign? What does it mean when a literal handful of corrupt politicians counter the wishes of the majority of the population through gerrymandering, blocking legislation, and supporting blatant corruption?
1 Like
Yes, it outlived its purpose 160 years ago.
2 Likes
You equate 80% population as a block vote. Itâs not. All they need is over 50%.
I donât belong to a tribe; I vote for whoever I think is the best candidate.
It means that corruption is rampant in American politics. Your apparent belief that only republicans are corruptible and democrats are pure and incorruptible shows a disingenuous bias.
Then why on Earth are you so worried about the urban population that you are willing to disenfranchise the other 50 percent?
SoâŚthe net result is that Democratic candidates in national elections have a 3-5 MILLION surplus of votes that are âstrandedâ on the coasts where the people are.
All indications suggest that there will be a large total vote turnout this time. Look how lopslided the vote count will be just in NY and California.
No, it shows that republicans have reveled in their corruption every day for almost 4 years as illustrated by their actions (or lack thereof) in the Senate and Whitehouse.
There is no bottom to the depths of their depravity as is illustrated by their silence in the face of a pandemic that will soon have killed a quarter million Americans while their constituents hear nothing but the most blatant lies and condemnation of the best scientists and medical experts on the planet.
There is no shame in DC, from either party but the republicans have taken it to a level and scale the world has not seen in the past 80 years.
3 Likes
And so we see that the working democracy of the USA supposedly needs to be thrown out because some here donât like the results it produces.
Guys, if you donât like your government, change it. If you donât like your constitution, change it. Democratically. But donât do it on a whim. Beware changing the rules to your sideâs political advantage because those tactics can be used against you.
Me, I enjoy the circus of US politics and look forward to a Trump win because thatâs to the worldâs advantage. The behaviour of the Democrats has been deplorable. Everything they accused Trump of for four years was not only a concocted lie, but they were the ones actually doing it. Hillary was a criminal (protected of course) and now we see Biden was the Big Guy in an international shake down family. I heard he owns an island next to Jeffrey Epsteinâs. Those issues are yet to be resolved by the justice system.
2 Likes