• 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!

Is This Democracy?

Loulit01

What We've Got Here is a Failure to Communicate
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2021
Messages
16,487
Reaction score
21,811
Location
Out on Parole
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
George W. Bush, who lost the popular vote, appointed John Roberts and Samuel Alito. Donald Trump, who lost the popular vote, appointed Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kvanaugh, and Amy Rabbit Barrett. Obama, who won the popular vote twice, appointed Sonya Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Court rulings, the law of the land, will be decided by Justices who do not have the support of the majority.

I won't go into how lying, treacherous McConnell refused to bring an Obama Justice candidate up for a vote because it was Obama's last year and then did exactly that in Trump's last year.

There will come a reckoning.
 
Unfortunately the founders were very short sighted and could not imagine mass education and were therefore fearful of stronger forms of democracy.

We are saddled with this bug in the system.
 
George W. Bush, who lost the popular vote, appointed John Roberts and Samuel Alito. Donald Trump, who lost the popular vote, appointed Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kvanaugh, and Amy Rabbit Barrett. Obama, who won the popular vote twice, appointed Sonya Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Court rulings, the law of the land, will be decided by Justices who do not have the support of the majority.

I won't go into how lying, treacherous McConnell refused to bring an Obama Justice candidate up for a vote because it was Obama's last year and then did exactly that in Trump's last year.

There will come a reckoning.
shrug...

You may not like it, but to answer your thread title question...Yes, this is democracy. Furthermore, everything you are wailing about is supported by the Constitution of the United States.

Perhaps your time would be better spent trying to change the Constitution, eh?
 
How about whoever leaked this draft seeking to undermine the institution?
 
It's democracy, but the illiberal kind. The 20th Century was a time when ordinary people began to have real power and influence over their government, and they had expanded protections against the abuses of moneyed interests. Since the 1980s, the tide has turned the other way, with unions and the middle class getting crushed, and with the corporate oligarchs and ideological factions having found ways to corrupt the political system in their favor. Everything from civil rights to labor protections to environmental protection is in jeopardy of being rolled back generations.
 
shrug...

You may not like it, but to answer your thread title question...Yes, this is democracy. Furthermore, everything you are wailing about is supported by the Constitution of the United States.

Perhaps your time would be better spent trying to change the Constitution, eh?
Perhaps your time would be better spent reading the Constitution.
 
How about whoever leaked this draft seeking to undermine the institution?
In what way does this undermine the institution? If this is what the Court will rule in June, how does the public learning of it in May undermine the Court?
 
Perhaps your time would be better spent reading the Constitution.
Perhaps your time would be better spent talking about the thread topic than talking about me.

You and your wailing thread are dismissed.
 
By making the Justice a lifetime position, the constitution indicates they should be appointed gradually, over time, making way for a wide variety of opinion while promoting stability. By stacking the court with three like-minded ideologues in four years, it is inevitable that this sort if reactionary change would happen.
 
"There will come a reckoning."

This is the reckoning. The demolishing of democracy.
 
Perhaps your time would be better spent talking about the thread topic than talking about me.

You and your wailing thread are dismissed.
So you can tell me how to spend my time but are offended when I tell you how to spend yours. Hypocrisy is so deeply imbedded in the right they don't see it anymore.

You and your nonsense amuse me. Do go on.
 
In what way does this undermine the institution? If this is what the Court will rule in June, how does the public learning of it in May undermine the Court?
This is a draft of an opinion, not a ruling. This is political activism by a clerk most likely. Or, even worse, one of the justices themselves. The only reason this was leaked was to generate outrage and hopefully shift the opinion as the process unfolds.
 
George W. Bush, who lost the popular vote, appointed John Roberts and Samuel Alito. Donald Trump, who lost the popular vote, appointed Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kvanaugh, and Amy Rabbit Barrett. Obama, who won the popular vote twice, appointed Sonya Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Court rulings, the law of the land, will be decided by Justices who do not have the support of the majority.

I won't go into how lying, treacherous McConnell refused to bring an Obama Justice candidate up for a vote because it was Obama's last year and then did exactly that in Trump's last year.

There will come a reckoning.

A reckoning by exactly who?

Our methods of voting, and reasons for how we vote, in our duopoly of a political system suggest we are not so monolithic as to vote entirely along the lines of any one issue especially as polarizing as abortion is.

All you are hinting at is the never ending debate on the Electoral College against the popular vote, which takes more than saying so to alter. Until then, elections have consequences and with that the Christian Taliban was able to seat 5 justices with the pure intention of fueling our culture wars.

The entire method of a nomination, conformation, and Senate handling of a Supreme Court Justice is wildly politized already and every single one of those who are going to end up overturning Roe v Wade during their respective conformations suggested it was established law. Now, not so much. Regardless, the judicial branch was never envisioned to be one where decision is reached by how the people feel about that issue.

It is asinine to conclude Republicans are done with their stacked Supreme Court.
 
shrug...

You may not like it, but to answer your thread title question...Yes, this is democracy. Furthermore, everything you are wailing about is supported by the Constitution of the United States.

Perhaps your time would be better spent trying to change the Constitution, eh?
Bullshit. McConnell stonewalling Obama's Supreme Court nominee is NOT "supported by the Constitution".
 
shrug...

You may not like it, but to answer your thread title question...Yes, this is democracy. Furthermore, everything you are wailing about is supported by the Constitution of the United States.

Perhaps your time would be better spent trying to change the Constitution, eh?
The electoral college isn't democracy.
 
Bullshit. McConnell stonewalling Obama's Supreme Court nominee is NOT "supported by the Constitution".
especially not when he turned around and did exactly the opposite for the next one. By his own reasoning either Goresuch or Coney/barret is illegetimimate.
 
By making the Justice a lifetime position, the constitution indicates they should be appointed gradually, over time, making way for a wide variety of opinion while promoting stability. By stacking the court with three like-minded ideologues in four years, it is inevitable that this sort if reactionary change would happen.
Unrelated but your new profilepicthure is spectacular.
 
So you can tell me how to spend my time but are offended when I tell you how to spend yours. Hypocrisy is so deeply imbedded in the right they don't see it anymore.

You and your nonsense amuse me. Do go on.

Oh, he will. That's all he does is go on. He runs away from genuine debate. Eventually, he corners himself and actually makes a declaratory statement resembling a claim or refutation. Then, he gets creamed.
 
Back
Top Bottom