You guys in the US don't *actually* live in a democracy.
Given that there have been at least two elections in recent times when the candidate for whom the majority of people voted for - that is those people who bothered to vote - did not actually win the election.
You guys in the US don't *actually* live in a democracy.
Given that there have been at least two elections in recent times when the candidate for whom the majority of people voted for - that is those people who bothered to vote - did not actually win the election.
That is not a genuine democracy guys.
On top of that, the best that anyone can come up with to potentially lead a major Western country are two pale males who are so stale they would be mandatorily retired in any other sector in any other country.
Ever read American History 101, Bianca? We were founded as, and remain, a constitutional republic, with checks and balances, and with federalism (at least until the Left manages to destroy either or both).
Actually I see it as a more advanced democracy. If we did not respect the electoral college as our founders intended, presidential contenders would only have to campaign in the major cities. Leaving many states in a total lack of democracy and without ANY representation.
The US is a democratic republic. It’s not just a popular vote. Our founders ensured that one or two states with large populations would not hold the power of the presidency.
I would keep laughing if it wasn't so sad. Our founding fathers were not concerned about States with large populations. Remember, there was no California, Texas or even Mississippi. There was no midwest or Pacific northwest States. Mail was delivered by horse. Election results were by Delegate to ensure efficient running of the Country, not population parity.
This is incorrect. The founders were quite concerned about large vs small population provinces, and that is one of the lessons in basic civics courses and in books on the founding.
Here's another fun fact Gar. The word is Colonies. British Colonies who revolted against their King. They objected to the 4% tax that was used to fight King George's foreign wars, among other things. The power to elect a President was NOT given to Congress for fear of them becoming King makers. Which Colony did you assume to have the largest political influence. New York? Virginia? North Carolina? You're not from here, are you?
Except that the States were not ratified at the time the electoral college was established.. There was no population census. It was not a leveler of State populations, as you were told. Get a map, a copy of the Constitution, and Google some dates. Then think for yourself. The system was perverted into the cluster we have today, but that is in no way what it was devised to be. One vote for every citizen. Delegates were chosen by their neighbors, not a party.
Everyone knew which states were larger in population and which smaller. I can't believe you wrote "the States were not ratified..." That is astonishingly historically illiterate.
The view from afar...
You guys in the US don't *actually* live in a democracy.
Given that there have been at least two elections in recent times when the candidate for whom the majority of people voted for - that is those people who bothered to vote - did not actually win the election.
That is not a genuine democracy guys.
On top of that, the best that anyone can come up with to potentially lead a major Western country are two pale males who are so stale they would be mandatorily retired in any other sector in any other country.
The US political system is f%$#d
Good luck guys!
- Love from Australia
Ever read American History 101, Bianca? We were founded as, and remain, a constitutional republic, with checks and balances, and with federalism (at least until the Left manages to destroy either or both).
Better to stay quiet and let people think you're a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.
Tell it to a bunch of old white men 250 years ago.
Actually I see it as a more advanced democracy. If we did not respect the electoral college as our founders intended, presidential contenders would only have to campaign in the major cities. Leaving many states in a total lack of democracy and without ANY representation.
The US is a democratic republic. It’s not just a popular vote. Our founders ensured that one or two states with large populations would not hold the power of the presidency.
I would keep laughing if it wasn't so sad. Our founding fathers were not concerned about States with large populations. Remember, there was no California, Texas or even Mississippi. There was no midwest or Pacific northwest States. Mail was delivered by horse. Election results were by Delegate to ensure efficient running of the Country, not population parity.
This is incorrect. The founders were quite concerned about large vs small population provinces, and that is one of the lessons in basic civics courses and in books on the founding.
Here's another fun fact Gar. The word is Colonies. British Colonies who revolted against their King. They objected to the 4% tax that was used to fight King George's foreign wars, among other things. The power to elect a President was NOT given to Congress for fear of them becoming King makers. Which Colony did you assume to have the largest political influence. New York? Virginia? North Carolina? You're not from here, are you?
Except that the States were not ratified at the time the electoral college was established.. There was no population census. It was not a leveler of State populations, as you were told. Get a map, a copy of the Constitution, and Google some dates. Then think for yourself. The system was perverted into the cluster we have today, but that is in no way what it was devised to be. One vote for every citizen. Delegates were chosen by their neighbors, not a party.
Everyone knew which states were larger in population and which smaller. I can't believe you wrote "the States were not ratified..." That is astonishingly historically illiterate.