Good thing we're a republic and not an "actual democracy". Using those labels to describe themselves inaccurately is foolish. The terms themselves are not meant to tell you anything about someone's ability to use reason, logic, or evidence, they're meant to give a general idea of someone's opinions and stances on issues. No one should use them INCORRECTLY.
These “labels” didn’t just drop out of thin air, they’re terms that have developed and been used for decades, if not centuries. No ones even thinking about not using them, the meanings grew from organicq need to tell one group fro the other, the ones using them chose them. over decades of use they evolved and moved from group and everyone used them in their respective time era. You laughing off rich deep meanings passed from generation to generation... the real fool is the one demeaning the entire political system who has a profound misunderstanding of any of it, your thesis is nonsense. But I mean it in a nice way🤣😂😂🤣
@Thats Amazing- that’s nonsense, just bc they mean nothing to you doesn’t mean everyone should stop- you are just too uninformed to understand most of it. Did you take 7th grade civics? That’s when they teach you the fundamentals of the constitution and teach you about different forms of government, how they work, etc, you know the basic stuff.To say the ec should be abolished because it’s not an actual democracy is jibberish. Do you think you are now the dictionary, and make up your own ridiculous definitions for words that are literally centuries old and change them to what you like, and we’re supposed to take you seriously.. because... why?These kinds of convos are serious and probably not something you’d want yo jump in feet first, and embarrass yourself. But I mean it in a nice way...😅😎😎😎
@Sixgun77 1) So yes, we're a democratic republic, not a direct democracy; that's referring to how we elect legislators on our behalves who then ideally forward our interests, rather than we personally voting on legislation ourselves. The Electoral College has nothing to do with the point you just made, about how we are a democratic republic, because in the EC system, our votes are not going to who they are supposed to be actually going to-- our votes are not actually electing the president. They instead are going to delegates who then ideally use our votes to then vote for the president, essentially like middlemen. However, NO OTHER ELECTION IS LIKE THAT. Your vote for a senator literally goes to that senator-- that's democracy. Your vote for governor literally goes to that governor-- that's democracy. But your vote for president does not actually go to that candidate-- that's not democracy.2) "they're meant to give a general idea of someone's opinions and stances on issues" And what I'm saying is that they don't actually do that. Which is why they are erroneous and stupid.
@Girther10 You're wrong about everything you said. Would you like to try again?
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
... Are you stupid?
Yeah, that makes no sense. Can you sober up and try again?
The libtards haven't taken civics and they have been indoctrinated to psychosis as it appears with these replies. Pure "idiocracy" is happening.
Very well said. 👍
What if only legal residents vote?
@rivjanel then we could at least have a discussion about it. but in order for that to happen, first we need to close the border and stop letting floods of illegals in here in the first place. Because states like California will ALWAYS give them a way to vote as long as they're here. Or make national voter id's a thing, and quit letting liberals cry that "voter id is racist" while they scream for gun owners id.
@Soteris you ask what they would if no ec? They would campaign in the hugest populated ststes and not in the lesser populated states. For s foreigner I find it rich that you presume to know more than our founders.
And you consistently try to represent the liberal view with a bias
@rivjanel - true in a perfect world but that would require an overhaul of our immigration the Dems refuse to do that. They’d rather destroy our nation as they pursue absolute power. Are you a dem? I think yes.
Ok. I agree with the use of a voter ID, makes sense.
You just implied that illegals vote by asking that.
Of course it does make sense. Maybe you are becoming more rational
I was asking about his opinion, didn't tried to imply anything. I also know very little about US politics so, no, I'm not a democrat. I honestly don't know why you're being hostile.
@Girther10 Well of course politicians would prioritize the more populated areas, they are already doing that even with the electoral collage after all. But compared to the electoral collage system that only focuses on certain states a popular vote system would at the very least ensure that every state capital is a worthwhile stop for an aspiring politician.
@Soteris- you got it upside down. The ec functions nothing like what you just said. It’s effects over time and in every election there are different strategies used depending on how the demographic grow and changes The candidates and parties get tohgether regularly and make strategic decisions and exchange ideas about messaging and the differences in messaging in the myriad of states and regions. It’s not a simple as you make it out yo be.
Thvsuccessful politicians are the ones who know how to communicate effectively in all regions and all states, getting a turnout ids imperative.
@Girther10 You say that as if it matters when for example Trump wins with 3 million less votes. While its nice to have widespread appeal that is not what will win you the election. What will win you the election is getting the strategically important votes in swing states.
But california and NY wouldn't be winner take all. The republicans are already getting millions of votes in those states without trying, just like there are tons of democrats in blue states who are also ignored. Right now both parties basically campaign in like 16 states.
But in reality, it is actually reversed. Smaller states have more power than bigger states. Popular vote isn't about giving bigger states more power but rather giving every single individual an equal voice. If there are morr republicans in the country, republicans would win. Not states
Yeah, thats wrong. As it is, the electoral system is a winner take all system, with proportional electoral reps per capita. It wouldn't really change anything. Are you confusing electoral college reps with house reps and then confusing them with senators?
In which countries has it failed? Maxico has the popular vote. This last presidential election was one of the best of the country. A president who most of the Mexican population wanted was elected by the people. It was a very satisfying event.
I'm sure it was but would you want to live in Mexico? That's kind of the point. Just because someone gets the popular vote does not mean they will be what is best for the country. A CEO in california is not going to know what a farmer in kansas might desperately be needing and so on and so forth.
@Soteris That's better than what they'd do if we had no electoral college. And I disagree with your position. My state is pure red, and we've seen plenty of dem candidates swing thruogh
@Soteris They'd focus on NY and California only. And I agree, they're turning Texas purple... if Texas was smart, they'd build a wall to keep the Californians out... they already ruined their state.
@Soteris yeah, no. Californian are fleeing oppressive taxes.
He’s not even American... he doesn’t know shit.!
@Soteris Dude, you’re just 100% talking out of your ass right now. Texas doesn’t have an income tax. Give this one a rest. You’re flat out wrong.
@Soteris It has substantially lower taxes than California, holy shit you're being dense.
@Soteris None of that invalidates the truth that Californians are moving to Texas to avoid taxes. So once again, stop being a nob.
@Soteris why does it even matter to you. You aren’t American
@Soteris Oh god damn. Because the weather is good in Texas. And Texas is awesome. Too bad they’ll ruin it with their liberalism and before you know it there’ll be people shitting in the streets in Austin. They need a wall.
@bangyourhead: I wish I could escape from Maryland to Texas and help build that wall.
Don’t pay any attention to this idiot swed
@Rissyanne sorry, just saw that he isn't American. time to get rid of this fool
Asker he’s obsessed with the US
@Soteris dude you don’t live her you know nothing about what you are talking about
Not really. As it stands, each state is a winner take all, meaning if your blue in a red state, your vote probably won't matter. But the population of every state is really diverse, so without an electoral college, new york would still mostly vote blue, but there'd be more republican votes out as well.
You could argue it does the opposite. California, for instance, is one of the top republican vote states in absolute numbers, but they count for nothing, because the electoral college votes from California all go to the democrats. So to some extent, California democrats outvote the state's republicans, but then use the republican's population to send a lot of EC votes as democrat, which overwhelms some smaller states. That's then offset (somewhat as a fluke) by the fact that at the moment smaller states are somewhat overweighted and happen to be more republican.It's absolutely true that it would put more power within the republican party in large, blue states, and more power within the democrat party in large red states. Right now California republicans and Texan democrats don't matter … and I'd suggest that makes both parties more polarized.
Um... no, people voting for President would determine who is President.
Has anyone ever told you that cynicism isn't a personality?