The Electoral College Is the Greatest Threat to Our Democracy

HALF-BAKED BELIEFS

Bollocks - your text in red above.

True Democracies are those that respect the popular-vote. They function adequately well in countries like Canada and Australia - but also in the European Union. The total population in a True Democracy amounts, therefore, to at the very least about twice the population of the US!

Like many in the US, apparently, you wish to remain wedded to what you were told in Civics class at high-school. (That is, IF you've ever had a civics-class in high-school!)

And if you did, like mine, they probably hopped, skipped and jumped over the annoying criticism of Gerrymandering and the Electoral College (because both can contrive/finagle the results of a popular vote). Which is how Donald Dork got elected - and, heaven forbid, could get reelected!

Like most Replicants on this forum, you mention that the "usa is a constitutional republic, not a democracy", in a desperate attempt to divorce the two meanings. Buy a dictionary and check that the definitions of both republic and democracy are functionally the same.

It is therefore useless to debate with someone who will not recognize the above facts, and wishes to self-indulge in whatever "half-baked beliefs" the Replicant Party shoves down their throat ...

 

Of course it is - just like any other democracy that exists on earth.

Nowhere else does a developed nation contrive to falsify the popular-vote results by means of Gerrymandering or employing an Electoral College (winner takes all votes!) to manipulate outcomes!

One has to be a damn fool to accept such conniving of the popular-vote, whether Democrat or Republican. But both parties today recognize the fact that - with both Gerrymandering and the Electoral College voting mechanisms - they either observe the so-called "rules" or they lose elections.

It's not the people who must change, but the voting mechanism that is manifestly unjust and therefore the election outcomes wrong, wrong, wrong ... !

 

There are other "measures" that can be taken.

Why, for instance, have voting on a day when most people are working? Why not on a Sunday, when most people have free-time, and the following weekday (a Monday) so people who work on Sunday can vote)?

And why do we not have an IDENTITY CARD that can be employed to "obtain one's name on a balloting list" and then show the card when actually entering the ballot at the place of voting? One needs an ID to buy liquor but not to vote? WOW!

 

True

And the divide between libs and conservatives is growing larger and more violent

 

I notice you ignored the rest of my post, including on why we don't have a popular vote. Your "factual evidence" doesn't mean the system didn't work as intended. Lincoln only won 40% of the popular vote but was in a four way race and won a majority of the electoral votes. Seems to me the best man won.

 

If you can win fairly change the rules seems to be the Communist sorry Democrat way.

 

That is a funny line, very good.

 

LafayetteBis has swept the far right regressive arguments off the board.

 

I doubt that comment. That "divide" is a wild exaggeration of a fundamental difference in political outlook.

The Replicants have only one profound objective - to keep upper-income taxation low so that the rich and super-rich can fund their political TV-campaigns to seat everywhere "their candidate". Americans watch TV more than any other nation on earth - so TV political commercials are a key ingredient to getting elected. (America markets politicians the way it sells candy bars.)

And a Republican-dominated Supreme Court is doing NOTHING to change the injustice of voter manipulation mechanisms like Gerrymandering or the Electoral College. For as long as the Replicants control the Senate, nothing will be done to change the stagnant status-quo. Absolutely nothing. The HofR may be Dem, but both the Senate and the Supremes are Replicant.

So, if you don't like what's going on ... well, get the hell out! There's always Canada as an option. (If you like freezing your backside* in winter.)

*And if indeed it does get frozen nobody is going to keep you away from a doctor because you don't have the Canadian national healthcare option!

 

Once the Dems have the WH and Senate and House, they can increase the number of justices to thirteen on SCOTUS.

That will give the liberals an eight to five majority.

 

We were NEVER a true Democracy". That is a fallacy of the left never promoted until the early 20th century. Until then have were always spoken of as a "Republic"..... a Nation of Laws guarding the liberty of the individual. The socialist agenda is like two wolves and a sheep taking a vote as to what they will have for dinner. Class warfare is merely a tool to get one class of people to confiscate property from the minority to gain power. Argentina is merely one quick example of that.

Peculiar how the left likes to tie in the word "Democracy" with "Socialism". They feel they have dumbed down America enough to make it acceptable. Do not be mistaken.Both Socialism, Fascism and Communism come under one heading.....that is "STATISM". You can add the word "democratic " and it doesn;t change a thing.

 

"Statism" is a false trope by the right, who is going to find out just how mistaken they have been in next year's elections.

 

The New Green Deal is a perfect example of statism.

 

The popular-vote is the foundation stone of any Real Democracy on earth.

Your "excuses" are absurd and you have to reach back to Lincoln to find an argument? At the time of Lincoln, the US had not regressed to the simplistic two-party system of today. (Which just seems to be a bad habit shared uniquely by both the UK and the US.)

In the last 20 years, twice the Electoral College has elected the loser of the popular-vote. Iow, the basic precept of any Real Democracy was overturned by the Electoral College. Why?

"Because it's always been that way!" Which is a excuse showing ignorance of the foundation stone of any democracy - that of the result of the popular-vote in the determination of any who wins political office.

Meaning you cannot have an Electoral College where the winner of the popular-vote assumes ALL THE VOTES OF THE EC sent to Congress, which decides the winner.

That is not how a True Democracy functions to elect its Head of State ... !

 

Well, then, explain to me how increasing Democracy is going to increase social cohesion.

 

Indont know how they do things in France but its obviously not the same way we do it here

 

How true

 

Democracy is something that has to be taught in schools, that is, its basic precepts. Most important is that all native born citizens have the automatic right to vote regardless of colour or creed or education or any other criteria whatsoever.

To understand voting rights in America I suggest this WikiPedia article: Voting rights in the United States - where you will find that said rights are not as straight-forward as one might think.

We've made in the US a real mess of the matter and it is no wonder that our voting record is one of the poorest of any developed nation ...

 

Do you understand that you are in a Debate Forum? Which means that when you make a statement you are obliged to explain what you mean?

I guess not. Why not look for a Message Board to vent your spleen ... ?

 

When the Dems take over the WH and all of Congress, the GOP vote suppression tactics will be ended forever, and SCOTUS will be increased to 13 judges.

 

Statism - a political system in which the state has substantial centralized control over social and economic affairs.

The New Green Deal is all about government force changing the economy through centralized control. Surprised you don't know this.

 

The Electoral College is PART of our democracy. What a silly article. What is next? Are lefties going to tell us what a danger voting is?

 

Sure, and if one half of the electorate hates the other half then you have a stalemate and the state goes to hell.

 

The center and left will overwhelm the right next year and institute voting and participation reforms.

 

Fundamentally, in order to continue to support the EC you must believe that a voter in Wyoming should have three to four times the power to elect a President then a voter in California. If you believe that, then you love the EC. If you believe that all of us are equal, this anachronism cannot continue.