The end of Democracy?

[Philthy_Phil]

Who's Democracy? The USA? The USA is NOT a Democracy. In fact, I'll bet you $1,000.00 you cannot find the word Democracy in the US Constitution. Nor can you find it in the Declaration of Independence. Or the Bill of Rights or any other document the defines this nation. The United States of America is a REPUBLIC. That fact that you don't know this, or don't know the difference, disqualifies you from even discussing politics in this country.

Nobody was talking about the constitution or the declaration of Independence, shit sniffer. We were talking about democratically elected presidents you trumptard bitch.

 

[BlueEyesInLevis]

Can we just cut to the chase?
Was the 2020 elections stolen, rigged?
Is Joe Biden the duly elected president?
Who are you supporting currently and why?

1...No. While there were certainly election irregularities I have seen nothing yet to prove to me that Biden did not win the election.
2...Yes. See above
3...Im supporting DeSantis because I believe his is the best candidate for this nation going forward.

 

[BlueEyesInLevis]

How do you not know this???
After touting knowledge of the constitution?

I was asking a question... dont be so quick to attack.

 

[Bn2f]

I was asking a question... dont be so quick to attack.

I've not attacked... yet.
I am more than willing to let you tell your opinions on things.

 

[Bn2f]

I was asking a question... dont be so quick to attack.

Why do you believe that DeSantis is the best candidate?

 

[bijedi]

Who's Democracy? The USA? The USA is NOT a Democracy. In fact, I'll bet you $1,000.00 you cannot find the word Democracy in the US Constitution. Nor can you find it in the Declaration of Independence. Or the Bill of Rights or any other document the defines this nation. The United States of America is a REPUBLIC. That fact that you don't know this, or don't know the difference, disqualifies you from even discussing politics in this country.

This is, of course, a disingenuous post made in bad faith. You don't really believe the US is not a democracy, because if you did you wouldn't care if Trump was disqualified from appearing on a ballot. Why would that matter if we were not a democracy? You wouldn't claim that Joe Biden is an illegitimate president because he stole an election, because only in a democracy could you become president by winning an election.

There is really only reason to make this argument, and that is to weaken the faith of Americans in a democratic system. And the only reason one would want to do that is because they believe their policies, views and positions are unlikely to find favor with a majority of voters and therefore desire a more autocratic method of obtaining and maintaining power.

If you truly don't believe the United States is a democracy, then you should not vote in our elections because you would only do that in a democracy.

 

[bijedi]

That theory about Trump is not only unproven in a court of law,

The Supreme Court of the State of Colorado would beg to differ.

it is going to be shot down by the USSC soon.

THAT is an unproven theory.

Furthermore, if given an unbiased and thorough mental competency exam, Biden would no doubt be found mentally unfit for office.

Let me ask you a question... How would you react if some state, like Texas perhaps, decided to toss Biden off the ballot because of his obvious mental disability???

The Constitution does not disqualify someone from being eligible to serve as president on the basis of mental fitness. This WOULD be an unconstitutional action which I expect would be quickly challenged and overturned.

Once in office, he could be removed by the Vice President and either a majority of the principal officers of the executive departments or Congress if the determined he was unable to perform the duties of the President.

 

[bijedi]

Okay... I'll bite. How was Obama Constitutionally ineligible to serve? Are you supporting the born in Kenya thing????

Obama WAS eligible to serve as President.

Obama IS not eligible to serve as President due to the 22nd amendment and the fact that he has served two terms as President. For the same reason, Bill Clinton and George Bush are not eligible to serve as President.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Unlike you I believe in our Constitution

Good for you, and if you don't want Trump up for another round, don't vote for him. Simple. Trump didn't do fuck all for the economy,he rode the recovery of Obama's term. Obama didn't do fuck all, it was Mark Carney who pulled the worlds proverbial nuts out of the economic fire that Bush and Clinton allowed to happen.

 

[jaF0]

Unlike you I believe in our Constitution

3...Im supporting DeSantis because I believe his is the best candidate for this nation going forward.

Those two comments do not go together.

 

[BlueEyesInLevis]

Those two comments do not go together.

Tell me EXACTLY where DeSantis and the Constitution diverge.

 

[BlueEyesInLevis]

Obama WAS eligible to serve as President.

Obama IS not eligible to serve as President due to the 22nd amendment and the fact that he has served two terms as President. For the same reason, Bill Clinton and George Bush are not eligible to serve as President.

I understand her point now, thank you.

 

[BlueEyesInLevis]

The Supreme Court of the State of Colorado would beg to differ.

THAT is an unproven theory.


The Constitution does not disqualify someone from being eligible to serve as president on the basis of mental fitness. This WOULD be an unconstitutional action which I expect would be quickly challenged and overturned.

Once in office, he could be removed by the Vice President and either a majority of the principal officers of the executive departments or Congress if the determined he was unable to perform the duties of the President.

Both scenarios would be Unconstitutional as you will find out soon.

 

[HisArpy]

This is, of course, a disingenuous post made in bad faith. You don't really believe the US is not a democracy, because if you did you wouldn't care if Trump was disqualified from appearing on a ballot. Why would that matter if we were not a democracy? You wouldn't claim that Joe Biden is an illegitimate president because he stole an election, because only in a democracy could you become president by winning an election.

There is really only reason to make this argument, and that is to weaken the faith of Americans in a democratic system. And the only reason one would want to do that is because they believe their policies, views and positions are unlikely to find favor with a majority of voters and therefore desire a more autocratic method of obtaining and maintaining power.

If you truly don't believe the United States is a democracy, then you should not vote in our elections because you would only do that in a democracy.

Written by someone who doesn't understand what a republic actually is.

A republic is a "representative government." Those representatives are chosen by the populace in elections from the candidates who desire to hold those offices in the government.

A democratic government is a "non-representative" government. The will of the people controls the will of the government through the use of balloting to determine what course of action the government will take on every issue from who holds office to what they can and cannot do with the powers of that office.

Democracy isn't just voting. Both forms of government use voting to determine who holds office. The difference is that republican forms of government trust those elected to perform their duties and function without interference while democracies require that the people be "hands on" regarding official policy and actions and the government be nothing more than a shell directed by the majority.

 

[bijedi]

Both scenarios would be Unconstitutional as you will find out soon.

The former is absolutely possible. The SCOTUS opinions on this will be interesting.


The latter would require a constitutional amendment, which does not seem likely at this time.

 

[John_von_Neumann]

Written by someone who doesn't understand what a republic actually is.

A republic is a "representative government." Those representatives are chosen by the populace in elections from the candidates who desire to hold those offices in the government.

A democratic government is a "non-representative" government. The will of the people controls the will of the government through the use of balloting to determine what course of action the government will take on every issue from who holds office to what they can and cannot do with the powers of that office.

Democracy isn't just voting. Both forms of government use voting to determine who holds office. The difference is that republican forms of government trust those elected to perform their duties and function without interference while democracies require that the people be "hands on" regarding official policy and actions and the government be nothing more than a shell directed by the majority.

Holy shit. This "lawyer" apparently never learned the distinction between direct and indirect democracy. Back to law school for you!

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

Okay... I'll bite. How was Obama Constitutionally ineligible to serve? Are you supporting the born in Kenya thing????

Barack Obama already served two terms, Arnold Schwarzenegger is a naturalized citizen, and Donald Trump is an insurrectionist. The Constitution bars all three from being elected President in 2024.

 

[bijedi]

Written by someone who doesn't understand what a republic actually is.

A republic is a "representative government." Those representatives are chosen by the populace in elections from the candidates who desire to hold those offices in the government.

A democratic government is a "non-representative" government. The will of the people controls the will of the government through the use of balloting to determine what course of action the government will take on every issue from who holds office to what they can and cannot do with the powers of that office.

Democracy isn't just voting. Both forms of government use voting to determine who holds office. The difference is that republican forms of government trust those elected to perform their duties and function without interference while democracies require that the people be "hands on" regarding official policy and actions and the government be nothing more than a shell directed by the majori

Written by someone who isn't aware that not all Republics are democracies or that democracy is not limited to Athenian Assembly style democracies.

A republic can be any form of government where the head of state is not a monarch. From Merriam Webster:
1
a(1)
: a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usually a president
(2)
: a political unit (such as a nation) having such a form of government

You can have authoritarian republics (e.g. Cuba, North Korea) as easily as democratic republics.

As for democracy, while it can be used to refer to an Athenian Assembly style of governance, it is rarely used that way today. In common usage it is more likely to refer to some model of Roman Republic style democracy. Again, I refer you to Merriam Webster:


1
a
: government by the people
especially : rule of the majority
b
: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections


It would appear that you don't have a very good grasp of the subject material. I would recommend you take a remedial course before representing a client in court where these matters are relevant, counselor.

 

[Bn2f]

Barack Obama already served two terms, Arnold Schwarzenegger is a naturalized citizen, and Donald Trump is an insurrectionist. The Constitution bars all three from being elected President in 2024.

Obama WAS eligible to serve as President.

Obama IS not eligible to serve as President due to the 22nd amendment and the fact that he has served two terms as President. For the same reason, Bill Clinton and George Bush are not eligible to serve as President.

I'm actually disappointed that anyone had to tell him this, especially after BEIL's boast on the constitution.
We all don't know everything all the time, but I'm saying a whole freakin day went past and this person never took the initiative to look up the reason he got pushback on his claim.
Not a good leg put forward for this person to be taken seriously.

 

[HisArpy]

Written by someone who isn't aware that not all Republics are democracies or that democracy is not limited to Athenian Assembly style democracies.

A republic can be any form of government where the head of state is not a monarch. From Merriam Webster:
1
a(1)
: a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usually a president
(2)
: a political unit (such as a nation) having such a form of government

You can have authoritarian republics (e.g. Cuba, North Korea) as easily as democratic republics.

As for democracy, while it can be used to refer to an Athenian Assembly style of governance, it is rarely used that way today. In common usage it is more likely to refer to some model of Roman Republic style democracy. Again, I refer you to Merriam Webster:


1
a
: government by the people
especially : rule of the majority
b
: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections


It would appear that you don't have a very good grasp of the subject material. I would recommend you take a remedial course before representing a client in court where these matters are relevant, counselor.

Again, written by someone who DOES NOT KNOW what a republic actually is.

Quoting Webster doesn't change the fact that you don't know or understand what you're talking about. In basic form a republic is as I said, a representational government whereby those in authority are elected by the populace. In basic form a democracy is a non-representative government whereby the populace votes on every issue and the will of the majority controls.

Taken into real world terms; a representational government consists of representatives who are all equal in voice. When they decide on a course of action, the entire populace is represented equally.

In contrast a non representational government is controlled by the areas with the most population. This means that when the populace decides on a course of action, the less populated areas get overridden by the majority in the densely populated areas even if the decision is destructive or harmful to the less populated area residents.

In the end quoting Webster does nothing except showcase that you don't know the basics about what you opine over because Webster has no depth and is controlled by those who ALSO don't know the difference between republic and democracy.

 

[John_von_Neumann]

Again, written by someone who DOES NOT KNOW what a republic actually is.

Quoting Webster doesn't change the fact that you don't know or understand what you're talking about. In basic form a republic is as I said, a representational government whereby those in authority are elected by the populace. In basic form a democracy is a non-representative government whereby the populace votes on every issue and the will of the majority controls.

Taken into real world terms; a representational government consists of representatives who are all equal in voice. When they decide on a course of action, the entire populace is represented equally.

In contrast a non representational government is controlled by the areas with the most population. This means that when the populace decides on a course of action, the less populated areas get overridden by the majority in the densely populated areas even if the decision is destructive or harmful to the less populated area residents.

In the end quoting Webster does nothing except showcase that you don't know the basics about what you opine over because Webster has no depth and is controlled by those who ALSO don't know the difference between republic and democracy.

You're an idiot.

 

[jaF0]

I'll guess part of the problem in understand was the wording here:

Just like Barack Obama and Arnold Schwarzenegger, Donald Trump is Constitutionally ineligible to hold the office of President.

BO is not ineligible like Arnie is.

BO is ineligible like Shrub and Bubba are.

Arnie is ineligible for a different reason.

The Orangutan is ineligible because he's an anti-American imbecile.

 

[bijedi]

Again, written by someone who DOES NOT KNOW what a republic actually is.

Quoting Webster doesn't change the fact that you don't know or understand what you're talking about. In basic form a republic is as I said, a representational government whereby those in authority are elected by the populace. In basic form a democracy is a non-representative government whereby the populace votes on every issue and the will of the majority controls.

Taken into real world terms; a representational government consists of representatives who are all equal in voice. When they decide on a course of action, the entire populace is represented equally.

In contrast a non representational government is controlled by the areas with the most population. This means that when the populace decides on a course of action, the less populated areas get overridden by the majority in the densely populated areas even if the decision is destructive or harmful to the less populated area residents.

In the end quoting Webster does nothing except showcase that you don't know the basics about what you opine over because Webster has no depth and is controlled by those who ALSO don't know the difference between republic and democracy.

LOL.

So basically, I have to agree to your definitions, you are the ultimate arbiter of the English language.


Yeah, no. I'm not agreeing to your rules. You don't get to determine what words mean. The history and usage of these terms is clear, and it doesn't support you claims. As your attempt to hand wave away the literal dictionary definition of those word shows.

And if you don't like Websters, how about the OED?

republic
a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.

democracy
a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.


or maybe Cambridge?

republic
a country without a king or queen, usually governed by elected representatives of the people and a president:

democracy
the belief in freedom and equality between people, or a system of government based on this belief, in which power is either held by elected representatives or directly by the people themselves

Either the majority of English dictionaries don't know the meanings of these words, or you don't.

I think I will go with the consensus on this one.

 

[jaF0]

I have no idea who you're babbling to, but neither of those words applies directly to the United States. As mentioned above, we are a Democratic Republic, a combination of the two systems.

The U.S. is a Democratic Republic.

Democratic republic - Wikipedia​

A democratic republic is a form of government operating on principles adopted from a republic and a democracy. As a cross between two similar systems, democratic republics may function on principles shared by both republics and democracies.

Is America a democracy or a republic? Yes, it is : NPR​

Sep 10, 2022The government seated in Washington, D.C., represents a democratic republic, which governs a federated union of states, each of which in turn has its own democratic-republican government for...

Yes, the Constitution Set Up a Democracy - The Atlantic​

Yes, the Constitution Set Up a Democracy - The Atlantic Ideas 'America Is a Republic, Not a Democracy' Is a Dangerous—And Wrong—Argument Enabling sustained minority rule at the national level...

 

[bijedi]

I have no idea who you're babbling to, but neither of those words applies directly to the United States. As mentioned above, we are a Democratic Republic, a combination of the two systems.

Actually, either of those is more than adequate by themselves as you can see from the above definitions. Until recently, no one had a problem referring to our system of government of as a democracy as it was understood to be shorthand for representative democracy. I don't believe anybody is under the illusion the US uses the Athenian Assembly model of democracy. Certainly not at the national or state level. And when referred to as a republic, it is understood to be representative republic with popularly elected representatives. The two words have been used interchangeably since before the Constitution was written.

But then the GOP decided it needed to diminish the importance of our democratic institutions in order to impose their vision of a more authoritarian state. Hence the attack on the word democracy. Hence this silly debate about how to describe the federal and state governments.

If we are going to be pedantic about it, republic simply means the head of state is not a monarch. But it in general usage, it is assumed to be referring a representative republic where power is held by the people and exercised through their representatives (usually popularly elected, but not always). Additionally, the powers of the representatives in the US are (nominally) restricted by the Constitution. So a more properly prescriptive description would be a constitutional representative democracy or, if you must, a constitutional democratic republic.

But really, you can just call it a democracy. Unless you have a non-democratic, authoritarian political agenda you are trying to push.