• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Electoral College: Purpose, Problems, Alternatives

James972 said:
Madison gave us a Republic, after reading history, because liberal mob rule democracies had turn into tyrannies....
Click to expand...

No they haven't - except one

The Wiemar Republic was the only democracy to fail in modern times
You could add the French 1st Republic but that never really got going as a democracy
Right wingers like you cite a 2,500 years old Athenian Republic as an example of the failure of democracy without knowing why, or the old Roman Republic which wasn't a democracy at all before it became an empire with an emperor.

Why do you claim millennia years old direct democracy is proof of anything but ignore the failures of republics ?


...experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
Click to expand...


What forms of government - where and when ? Give us ONE example.
Are we still talking about 500BC in Athens ?


...liberals support the libNazi Green New Deal Depression...
Click to expand...

Why would liberals support Nazis ?
Why are you opposed to "Green Policies" ?
Why would liberals support a depression ?
Why do you call any policy a New Deal or oppose it ?


Continuing to call dictators like Hitler and Stalin liberal just makes you look stupid and infantile - why won't you reveal your age ?


...of course the treasonous liberal hates the Founders though they created the greatest country in human history by far...
Click to expand...


Why would a liberal hate 18th century politicians ?


YouTube


This is a good video, watch it and try to learn something


...the smaller the govt the smaller the tyranny of which it is capable. 1+1=2 see why we say liberalism is based in pure ignorance...
Click to expand...

LOL

What it a "small tyranny" - can you give us an example of one

And you have the nerve to call others ignorant ?

How old are you ?
 
OpportunityCost said:
No, it isn't. Its happened locally in several cases if you cared to learn about them.
Click to expand...

I would love to learn about them. Do tell. Tell us how a majority compelled a minority against the law and got away with it. Dying to hear about it, next call is the law.
 
James972 said:
people are people whether American European or Asian . They supported Hitler Stalin Mao and will do it again if liberals get their way. Do you understand?
Click to expand...

Americans are American. Hitler was not American, Mao was not American. Stalin was not American.

Do try and focus.
 
James972 said:
The original Constutution gave them rights but modern liberals oppose the original Constitution and originalist judges. We all have to support the near genocidal liberal welfare programs, pay Social Security, and support socialist health care. What are minority rights???? A liberal will have no idea on earth what he is talking about.
Click to expand...

Your post makes no rational sense.
 
James972 said:
THe Founders were among the greatest geniuses in human history. They knew human nature. They knew modern 20th Century human beings would support HItler Stalin Mao FDR Sanders AOC so they did not give us direct democracy or mob liberal rule.
Click to expand...

Find out what mob rule means in a dictionary. Then try discussing the subject.
 
James972 said:
nothing rigged about being protected from mob rule democracy. Hopefully in 2020 it will protect us from the LibNazi Green New Deal!!
Click to expand...

You still have not learned what MOB RULE is and why it is utterly senseless to refer to it for a normal winner in an election. Please do at least try to learn. You may like it.
 
Rich2018 said:
No it wasn't, slavery was never legal in the UK


Somerset v Stewart - Wikipedia


Though British subjects could run a slave trade ship from a British port - principally Bristol, Liverpool and Glasgow - until 1807







Good since you got point 1 wrong, we are spared more false claims.

I don't watch the "L"
Click to expand...

This refers to the import of new slaves not the end of slavery. The US did the same thing 50 years before the Civil War. The entire Atlantic slave transport ended by 1833.

Atlantic slave trade - Wikipedia

Watching? No. You are suffering an "L"
 
Rich2018 said:
When ?

When has a democracy ever turned into a tyranny ? Only one democracy has failed in modern times and that was the Wiemar Republic

You could add the French 1st Republic to that list but really it never got going as a true democracy.

Blinkered, right wing American might cite the Athenian democracy as one that failed but its political system didn't. Athenian democracy was a direct form (if it really happened at all) and it was a Republic too, as was the failed Roman Republic that turned into an empire.

I'm curious why you're mistrustful of democracy but so forgiving of republics with their failed history turning into tyrannies ?
Click to expand...

Republics fail when they violate their own laws *hint hint*
 
It's fun to see a thread one started go on as long as this one. It's instructive, too. I've been trying to suss out how much was on topic (about half), how much is regurgitated talking points (+40%) and how much substantive discussion (<10%). Statistically in this forum that is really good. I'm enjoying it. Keep it up!
 
Casca XV said:
This refers to the import of new slaves not the end of slavery. The US did the same thing 50 years before the Civil War. The entire Atlantic slave transport ended by 1833.

Atlantic slave trade - Wikipedia

Watching? No. You are suffering an "L"
Click to expand...



The point is, if you cared to read the link, is that a British court case (before 1776 Btw) established that slavery was not legal in Britain - indeed it had never been despite your claim that a 19th century law outlawed it in Britain, it did not.

I don't watch the L Word - never have.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Republics fail when they violate their own laws *hint hint*
Click to expand...

No Republic could or can violate laws.

Only people violate laws.


So is there something about a Republic that makes it easier for its laws to be broken ?

Is a Republican form of government therefore less stable ?
 
Rich2018 said:
No Republic could or can violate laws.

Only people violate laws.


So is there something about a Republic that makes it easier for its laws to be broken ?

Is a Republican form of government therefore less stable ?
Click to expand...

No one agrees to an answer on your questions. Quit asking questions you know cannot be answered conclusively.
 
Rich2018 said:
The point is, if you cared to read the link, is that a British court case (before 1776 Btw) established that slavery was not legal in Britain - indeed it had never been despite your claim that a 19th century law outlawed it in Britain, it did not.

I don't watch the L Word - never have.
Click to expand...

The point is, you need to make the US the bad guy so you are rewriting history and saying slavery was illegal in the UK before 1833, because it supports your bad argument about slavery nullifying the Constitution or some such crap.
 
Vadinho said:
What in the world....you list rebellions as proof that the law does not protect the minority from the majority? I guess you do not believe in the judicial branch.
Click to expand...

The battle of Athens in particular was a minority rigging an election to stay in power and using force to do so, on US soil.
 
OpportunityCost said:
The point is, you need to make the US the bad guy so you are rewriting history and saying slavery was illegal in the UK before 1833, because it supports your bad argument about slavery nullifying the Constitution or some such crap.
Click to expand...

Yes, slavery makes a mockery of the Declaration of Independence and the Founding Fathers idea about "freedom" - as if the infant USA had some monopoly on "freedom"

They talk about liberty when condoning slavery - the 1st president was a slave owner.


Most of the US people were not allowed a voice/vote and the DOI speaks of crap like "We The People" - what "people" did it cover ?

You countered with the notion, well slavery was legal in Britain at the time but legal cases show it was not and there were NO slaves in Britain.


So grow up up face the fact that the Revolutionary War was not about "freedom".
 
Rich2018 said:
Yes, slavery makes a mockery of the Declaration of Independence and the Founding Fathers idea about "freedom" - as if the infant USA had some monopoly on "freedom"

They talk about liberty when condoning slavery - the 1st president was a slave owner.


Most of the US people were not allowed a voice/vote and the DOI speaks of crap like "We The People" - what "people" did it cover ?

You countered with the notion, well slavery was legal in Britain at the time but legal cases show it was not and there were NO slaves in Britain.


So grow up up face the fact that the Revolutionary War was not about "freedom".
Click to expand...

Well we know that's bull****, there wouldn't have been a mass buyout of slaves by the British government if there weren't any. You cant just rewrite history to suit your argument.
 
Rich2018 said:
In other words, you don't know.

So there's nothing special in your mind about being a republic ?
Click to expand...

That's a terrible argument you are trying to push, Democracies and Republics both have their pros and cons, almost no one agrees on what makes one better than the other.

PS Rich, no one knows conclusively.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Well we know that's bull****, there wouldn't have been a mass buyout of slaves by the British government if there weren't any. You cant just rewrite history to suit your argument.
Click to expand...

Not any slaves in Britain.

But various Founding "we hold these truths..." Fathers were slave owners

I wonder how they reconciled that ?
 
OpportunityCost said:
That's a terrible argument you are trying to push, Democracies and Republics both have their pros and cons, almost no one agrees on what makes one better than the other.

PS Rich, no one knows conclusively.
Click to expand...

The argument is of course BS

The point is that many on the right will say the USA is a Republic not a Democracy.

They will cite a 2,500 city's attempt to be more democratic as a reason democracy results in "mob rule" despite the fact that the USA has had more than its share of lynch mobs - and I don't ,mean just way back when or on a lawless frontier.

Yet they will never cite the failures of republics in the past. Strange isn't it ?



It is, of course, a total nonsense that the USA is not a democracy. And that you can somehow be democratic and not necessarily a democracy.
 
Rich2018 said:
The point is, if you cared to read the link, is that a British court case (before 1776 Btw) established that slavery was not legal in Britain - indeed it had never been despite your claim that a 19th century law outlawed it in Britain, it did not.

I don't watch the L Word - never have.
Click to expand...

Now this is just getting sad, I almost feel sorry for you.
 
Rich2018 said:
The point is that many on the right will say the USA is a Republic not a Democracy.
.
Click to expand...

obviously its a republican democracy. Voters have some authority as do many others as per the Constitution. Mystery solved. 1+1=2
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom