Only the total majority vote!

Borrrinnnnggggg!

I've corrected that notion elsewhere in this thread. (Both democracy and republic come from Greek and Latin origins and they MEAN THE SAME THING ... !!!!!!

 

Small "r" and not capitalized.

 

Democracy: In a democracy 51% beats 49%. In a democracy there is no such thing as a significant minority: there are no minority rights except civil rights granted by a condescending majority. A democracy is a dictatorship of the majority.

Republic: No state may join the United States unless it is a Republic. Our Republic is one dedicated to "liberty and justice for all." Minority individual rights are the priority. One vote in a jury can stop all of the majority from depriving any one of the people of his rights; this would not be so if the United States were a democracy. The Constitution and Bill of Rights (hence we have a Republic) prohibits the government from limiting or taking away certain inalienable rights of the people, even if that government was freely chosen by a majority of the people.

 

Democracy is so casually tossed around by Democrats one might not know we truly are a republic. A republic is a joining of states. We have 50 such states. We do not have national voting on issues from state to state. For instance I live in CA but never vote on Oregon nor nevada nor Arizona issues. We simply do not play a role in other states issues. We are a republic.

Even in my city, we do not get the chance to vote on those issues. We get a chance to vote for the council, but not what they get to vote on.

Democracies include voting on all issues by all citizens.

An actual Democracy has to involve all citizens in all matters who all vote.

 

Marvelous understanding.

 

Patent malarkey ...

 

What you know about the history is faulty.

It was a French general (called Lafayette) that saved your sorry-asses from the British. Or, did you not take a history course in High School?

The Paris Accords don't matter to Donald Dork because he refused to sign them. It did matter to the almost 200 states that did sign the accords. You (plural) will learn the hard-way - the first signs will be apparent when you (plural) contract high-rates of lung cancer ...

PS: The US will sign the agreement once he's been shoved into the political oblivion where he belongs ...

 

How curious for someone like me born in Maryland of American parents ... !

PS: The world is changing fundamentally and you've seen nothing yet. Uncle Sam had better get his ass in gear because sitting on his laurels will get him nowhere in this Brave New World of ours.
PPS: Old French expression (qui aime bien châtie bien) - Who loves well chastises as well. (Or, "spare the rod and spoil the child")

 

Good sense! But for that to happen people must sense that their Collective Vote really matters! (Some countries impose a fine if one does not vote.)

The average voter turnout historically comparable to other countries: here

Drill down to the infographic titled "By international standards, U.S. voter turnout is low" - the US is tenth from the bottom.

If we do not get off our collective-arses then nothing will change. We Yanks spend the most time of any nation watching TV!

All political campaigns spend heavily on TV-advertising. I wonder if that is not a waste of good money. Anyway, in many EU countries TV-advertising is not allowed. Though debates amongst candidates for office are at least three or four times a week. So, "things" do get discussed ...

 

Good sense! But for that to happen people must feel that their Collective Vote really matters!

The average voter turnout historically comparable to other countries: here

Drill down to the infographic titled "By international standards, U.S. voter turnout is low" - the US is tenth from the bottom.

If we do not get off our collective-arses then nothing will change. We Yanks spend the most time of any nation watching TV!

All political campaigns spend heavily on TV-advertising. I wonder if that is not a waste of good money.

Anyway, in many EU countries TV-advertising is not allowed. Though debates amongst candidates for office are at least three or four times a week. So, "things" do get discussed ...

 

The most impressive political makeup of a country that I have ever seen is Switzerland. They vote on all major issues, calling it Direct Democracy - and they've been doing it for more than a century. (If interested see here.)

 

Don't like the truth? Don't like when your man's name is twisted and abused? Then, why do it to Trump?
And tell me, what gives you the right to have your opinions considered for our country, when you can't seem to run your own that well? Where is the forum for France. Go and make your complaints about France.

 

Hey, French-Boy. Go away and mind your own business. Your ceaseless interest in how we manage our affairs makes no sense. Go fix (or join, if appropriate) your yellow jacket issue.

 

I am not French and there are an estimated 3 to 6 million of us Americans who live abroad. But we have no representative in Congress. Still, Uncle Sam seems to think we owe him taxes anyway.

But jerks like you think you can insult me because of my political opinions. Ever heard of the words "Freedom of speech?". Well, add to it "Freedom of Thought".

Now stuff that where you can't take a pill for it ...

 

Because he deserves it. He is a sick, sick man - as was advised by American mental-health professionals in an article on the web-site of Psychology Today: "The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump". Which has had a certain success amongst that community.

Excerpt from the article in Psychology Today:

A story has it (believe this or not) that his father had problems with him when he was a boy in High School. So the father sent him to a Military Academy. Within a month some fellow cadets tried to throw him out a second-floor dormitory window. (Now that is hearsay, because it was printed in a review of the person in question.)

But his actions since have demonstrated to many that he has a highly narcissistic personality disorder. Which has never been treated.

Anyone with such a demonstrable psychological disturbance should not be PotUS and his actions have demonstrated clearly that "he has a problem". Nixon had a problem too - we seem to elect psychiatrically-challenged people to the highest office in the land ...

 

W/E you want to call it, 'republic' or 'democracy', ours is limited by a Constitution. The terminology does not negate the perception and the law. The EC system was part of the system as a whole that was mutually agreed upon as condition of states joining the union, and cannot be anulled without each states consent or the perception of the Union crumbles.

Its a Constitutional Convention to get rid of it, or its the death of the Union, and a Constitutional Convention is implausible in todays atmosphere of division.

 

No a Constitutional Convention is not necessary. Congress need only pass legislation requiring the Electoral Colleges to report to Washington the unadulterated popular-vote. You know, like every other electoral voting for a Head of State in a developed nation is required to do.

And, for that matter, for all other political elections undertaken in the USofA.

And if this happens, I'm sure that Replicants will still win elections! Donald Dork is a one-in-a-million who happened to "luck out" because of a serious failure in the Electoral College that must be fixed ...

 

And what makes you think the states that value the EC will just accept that?

 

I'll disagree with your glum take on the direction of the country. We do need to get spending under control and fix our education system so they stop brainwashing children. Also need a press that isn't so biased to one side.

The two party system has managed to keep a balance. The pendulum swings back and forth. What Democrats seem to have abandoned is individual liberties for government control.

 

I'll disagree.

 

An expat. Good for you. Now our politics is none of your concern.

 

Why the hell not? We expats are required to pay American taxes!

(You don't like what I write, then ignore the posts! Duhhhhhh ...)

 

That's a good question! Normally amending the Constitution requires a majority approval of the states. But, if ratified by the majority, a minority cannot refuse it because it supposedly conflicts with the state's constitution. (Yes, some states have'em!)

It's a national election, and if the American voter gets uppity enough about the flagrant manipulation of the popular-vote by the Electoral College it will be voted upon in each state. Of course, if a majority of states refuse the change, then nothing happens.

But the manipulation of the popular-vote is soooo flagrant it is difficult to imagine that a majority of states would NOT vote to change it. Otoh, I would not be surprised if that occured. Why?

Because most Americans still have not had adequate instruction in Civics. It is illogical that the popular-vote is not the sole authentication of a presidential vote outcome.

And if Electoral Colleges can manipulate the presidential vote why not that of the state governorship? Or any other elective office?

Each state is given a number of Electoral College voters based upon the state's population! Why should any state be allowed to manipulate that vote with an idiotic "winner takes all the votes" rule ... ? Stealing EC-votes is patently unfair and should be legally disallowed ... !

 

The only ones stealing EC votes are Democrats who insist upon counting non-citizens to give them an advantage over smaller states. Just like they wanted to count their slaves who they abused for free labor but only were allowed to count 3/5ths of a slave. The illegal population is the same exploitation of cheap labor and EC votes, Democrats haven't changed for 200 years.

 

Ayuh,..... Thank God, that We live in a Constitutional Republic,.....