More than a million mail-in ballot requests were canceled in three counties in January. Democrats say they're working to stem the effects of the change.
Just in case anyone reading this thread has ever been flummoxed by this “we’re not a democracy, we’re a republic” bullshit…
“Republic” and “Democracy” are two among many adjectives that describe the US governmental system. Here’s some other ones: “constitutional”, “bicameral”, “presidential”, “liberal”, “federal”.
None of these words fully and accurately describe our system. None of these words are mutually exclusive of each other. They’re just adjectives. Words that can be used to get you closer to the truth.
We have a system of government that relies on elections because it believes fundamental sovereignty flows from the will of the people. That defines us a democracy, regardless of whether votes are direct or indirect.
We have a system of government in which power sits in the hands of the public – in our case via selected representatives selected through elections. We do not have a king or similar formal nobility. We fit the definition of a republic.
Most people who make this stupid argument are just being trolly, disingenuous twerps that get off on sounding clever. Ignore them if you don’t have the will to clearly correct them. But a few of the people making this argument legitimately dislike democracy and want it done away with – they are authoritarians and they are the enemy of the people.
More simply, a republic is a form of democracy. The people who say ‘we’re not a democracy, we’re a republic’ are basically saying ‘that’s not a dog, that’s a golden retriever’.
My American History class had one question on every test: What form of government does the United States have? The answer: a democratic republic based on a federal system.
I like the term representative democracy because it implies that politicians should represent their constituents. Getting elected is not a license to vote your personal opinion - it’s to represent every one of your constituents. So if you get elected by one vote margin, you should vote in the middle. I know that’s not reality but it should be.
I don’t know, I think your attitude cleaves pretty tightly to the current president. It’s a thing he gets a lot of flak for from the left – that he compromises and consensus-builds against opponents that do not reciprocate when he ought to just be doing everything the people who voted for him want and ignore the opposition.
I think you’re alluding to a well-discussed term in the world of political science – delegation versus representation. A delegate who gets voted into office should do exactly what the voters want them to do through some theoretical poll before every decision, injecting no will of their own. A representative is picked based on their own convictions, personality, and belief, and so they should do the things they want and let the voters decide whether or not to keep letting them do so. Big upsides and downsides either way, but the US officials definitely tend to look more like reps than delegates.
Appreciate your reply. I’m no fan of Biden but he’s a million times better than the guy that clearly tried to subvert the will of the people. Without one man, one vote we have nothing.
Yeah, in this day and age of much easier communication compared to 1776, I’d like the idea of constituents at least having the ability to vote on policy of interest. Even though I don’t always agree with majority opinion, I continue to respect it.
There’s nothing Republicans hate more than democracy.
That is because Democracy includes most of the letters of democrat.
It’s also the reason why they keep repeating “were a republic not a democracy” because republic… republican. Fucking brain rot.
Just in case anyone reading this thread has ever been flummoxed by this “we’re not a democracy, we’re a republic” bullshit…
“Republic” and “Democracy” are two among many adjectives that describe the US governmental system. Here’s some other ones: “constitutional”, “bicameral”, “presidential”, “liberal”, “federal”.
None of these words fully and accurately describe our system. None of these words are mutually exclusive of each other. They’re just adjectives. Words that can be used to get you closer to the truth.
We have a system of government that relies on elections because it believes fundamental sovereignty flows from the will of the people. That defines us a democracy, regardless of whether votes are direct or indirect.
We have a system of government in which power sits in the hands of the public – in our case via selected representatives selected through elections. We do not have a king or similar formal nobility. We fit the definition of a republic.
Most people who make this stupid argument are just being trolly, disingenuous twerps that get off on sounding clever. Ignore them if you don’t have the will to clearly correct them. But a few of the people making this argument legitimately dislike democracy and want it done away with – they are authoritarians and they are the enemy of the people.
More simply, a republic is a form of democracy. The people who say ‘we’re not a democracy, we’re a republic’ are basically saying ‘that’s not a dog, that’s a golden retriever’.
That’s not a schooner, it is a sailboat.
That kid is back on the escalator!
There are non-democratic republics. Fascist states often fall into that category.
One small correction: The US has a system of government in which power sits almost exclusively in the hands of the wealthy.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/study-congress-literally-doesnt-care-what-you-think/5466723
🏆
My American History class had one question on every test: What form of government does the United States have? The answer: a democratic republic based on a federal system.
They hate freedom and liberty even more.
I like the term representative democracy because it implies that politicians should represent their constituents. Getting elected is not a license to vote your personal opinion - it’s to represent every one of your constituents. So if you get elected by one vote margin, you should vote in the middle. I know that’s not reality but it should be.
I don’t know, I think your attitude cleaves pretty tightly to the current president. It’s a thing he gets a lot of flak for from the left – that he compromises and consensus-builds against opponents that do not reciprocate when he ought to just be doing everything the people who voted for him want and ignore the opposition.
I think you’re alluding to a well-discussed term in the world of political science – delegation versus representation. A delegate who gets voted into office should do exactly what the voters want them to do through some theoretical poll before every decision, injecting no will of their own. A representative is picked based on their own convictions, personality, and belief, and so they should do the things they want and let the voters decide whether or not to keep letting them do so. Big upsides and downsides either way, but the US officials definitely tend to look more like reps than delegates.
Appreciate your reply. I’m no fan of Biden but he’s a million times better than the guy that clearly tried to subvert the will of the people. Without one man, one vote we have nothing.
Yeah, in this day and age of much easier communication compared to 1776, I’d like the idea of constituents at least having the ability to vote on policy of interest. Even though I don’t always agree with majority opinion, I continue to respect it.