well, are we still opposed to a democracy?

StanStill

Former Staff
Dec 2013
13,413
15,307
Work
at least every 2 to 6 years. until then, the citizens have no recourse. they cannot be removed (on the federal level) - with the exception of being impeached.
They don't need to be removed. If they see that their public image is tarnished by some stance that they took which goes against public opinion, and there is heat on them from constituents that could affect their ability to fund raise, they suddenly see the light and reconsider. It happens all the time. There is the election poll, which is of course important, but there is also the continual poll of public opinion. Public opinion is probably more precisely studied in the US (mostly for marketing research and advertising reasons, but those same research firms are happy to do work for political campaigns) than anywhere on Earth.
 
Jan 2014
16,554
6,362
south
Just because less than 50% show up to vote, that doesn't mean that they are opposed to the person in office. In fact if they were truly opposed, they probably would be more likely to show up. They're indifferent. So what's your strategy to get that number up to 100%?
if the citizens understand, as they would in a true democracy, that important bills would not get passed because of their inattention, they would vote. of course, that all depends. they will have nobody to blame but themselves. no more complaining about Washington or political partisanship.
would you vote if passage depended on it?
 

StanStill

Former Staff
Dec 2013
13,413
15,307
Work
if the citizens understand, as they would in a true democracy, that important bills would not get passed because of their inattention, they would vote. of course, that all depends. they will have nobody to blame but themselves. no more complaining about Washington or political partisanship.
would you vote if passage depended on it?
Wait a minute. Your strategy to increase turnout is "they will show up because it will be a true democracy"? I don't know if you realize this, but the people who don't show up to vote don't complain about Washington or political partisanship. Many of them think Washington DC is the capital city of Washington, and I'm sure some thing that George W Bush is the president.

What I want to know is what happens when they don't show up? If nothing happens, why will that motivate them to do so the next time around?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ian Jeffrey
Jan 2014
16,554
6,362
south
Wait a minute. Your strategy to increase turnout is "they will show up because it will be a true democracy"? I don't know if you realize this, but the people who don't show up to vote don't complain about Washington or political partisanship. Many of them think Washington DC is the capital city of Washington, and I'm sure some thing that George W Bush is the president.

What I want to know is what happens when they don't show up? If nothing happens, why will that motivate them to do so the next time around?
Wait a minute. Your strategy to increase turnout is "they will show up because it will be a true democracy"? I don't know if you realize this, but the people who don't show up to vote don't complain about Washington or political partisanship. Many of them think Washington DC is the capital city of Washington, and I'm sure some thing that George W Bush is the president.

What I want to know is what happens when they don't show up? If nothing happens, why will that motivate them to do so the next time around?
do nothing - get nothing. and yes, I do understand the concern about turnout as I am also concerned about it. will enough citizens even bother to vote? dunno. but, if 51% don't vote in favor, the bill won't pass.
 
Aug 2018
3,479
5,613
Vancouver
My province just had a mail in referendum with two levels of questions.

First question was do you want to keep first-past-the-post, or move to a representative democracy.

The second question was if the majority vote to change, which of three options would you prefer to change to.

The majority voted to stay with the current system. The only explanation I’ve ever heard for anyone wanting to stay is either A) I don’t understand any of this crazy hippie nonsense. Or B) Lib leftists trying to get Frenchy Muslim commies into feminist universities? Not on my watch!”
 
Jan 2014
16,554
6,362
south
My province just had a mail in referendum with two levels of questions.

First question was do you want to keep first-past-the-post, or move to a representative democracy.

The second question was if the majority vote to change, which of three options would you prefer to change to.

The majority voted to stay with the current system. The only explanation I’ve ever heard for anyone wanting to stay is either A) I don’t understand any of this crazy hippie nonsense. Or B) Lib leftists trying to get Frenchy Muslim commies into feminist universities? Not on my watch!”
no other explanation of the question? they did not explain what the differences are between "current" and "representative democracy" was on the ballot?
 
Aug 2018
3,479
5,613
Vancouver
your questions are very good and deserve an answer. I am speaking a true democracy, where the citizens make the decisions by majority vote. that, of course, leads to your next question concerning modifications. ,first, bills would be passed (or not) based on the absolute majority of the registered voters. second, all bill would be required to, in the body of the bill, contain the cost and method of financing - be it an additional tax or a budget change. and yes, the budget would be part of that.
I think the inevitable result is that I convince 51% of voters that we take your house, your daughter, and all your stuff and split it between us. I win, and the police cone and take all your stuff. Putting you in jail if you resist the lawful democratic wishes of 51% of voters.

There must be a supreme written document protecting all peoples rights above and beyond the majority’s ability to abuse the minority.

That was established in Western thinking by Charlemagne, The Magna Carta, the US Constitution, and finally culminated in universal sufferage in New Zealand, and then throughout the West in civil rights / bill of rights legislations.

It’s the reason for the Western worlds continuing ldominance in global culture, economics, politics and philosophy. It’s our prescious birthright and we should be ready to die to protect it for each other. And it’s why the rest of the world is beating down our door to get in.

That’s also why the US can elect an odeous boorish thug gangster who doesnt know or understand anything about any of this, but other Western countries will STILL side with the US over Chinese or Russian rivals. When the shit ever hits the fan.

He’ll only last 4-8 years. Our more important bond goes back millennium to Ancient Greece.
 
Aug 2018
3,479
5,613
Vancouver
no other explanation of the question? they did not explain what the differences are between "current" and "representative democracy" was on the ballot?
They explained on websites, in the packages that was mailed out, in radio and tv ads .... people who want change didn’t need convincing. We’re already informed and on board.

Others, the majority I guess, said “this is confusing. I don’t understand this. So it’s stupid Don’t change anything”
 
Dec 2018
5,301
2,086
Florida
we have seen what we have now in it's most ugly form. anybody ready to consider the benefits of a constitutional democracy yet? and no, it will not magically solve all our problems.
No. Democracy is mob rule and not the intent of the founders. It would allow a simple majority in a small overpopulated area to control and hold hostage other areas. And as populations continue to migrate? It will get worse for representation.

Constitutional Republics. All the way. It allows for the most fair representation of the most people.