• 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!

Minority Rule Cannot Last in America

Rogue Valley

Lead or get out of the way
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
94,171
Reaction score
82,451
Location
Barsoom
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

12/2/20
Minority rule is fast becoming the defining feature of the American republic. In 2000 and 2016, presidential candidates who received fewer votes than their opponents were nevertheless sent to the White House. Joe Biden’s 2020 victory came not because he won nearly 7 million more votes nationally than President Donald Trump, but rather because he won about 200,000 votes more in a handful of swing states. Congress has seen a similar dynamic: What, then, of the prospects of minority rule at the federal level in the coming years? The coming years seem likely to see Republicans attempt to strengthen their grip on power despite their weakness at the ballot box. With the appointment of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, conservatives have a 6–3 majority on the bench, and important rulings loom on issues such as health care, abortion rights, and gay marriage. Though Republican senators make up the majority in the chamber, they represent more than 20 million fewer Americans than Democratic senators do. Such lopsided electoral calculus seems to fly in the face of both parties’ principles. It cannot last. Policies supported by a majority of Americans in opinion polls could be ruled unconstitutional, all because a president who lost the popular vote nominated three justices, and senators representing a minority of the American population confirmed them.

With President-elect Biden likely facing a divided Congress, Democrats have no institutional means of turning electoral support into legislative action, to say nothing of fixing underlying representation issues.But Republicans may not be able to sustain their power for long—at least not peacefully. As the cases above show, when parties commit themselves to minority rule, the backlash can be severe. While the letter of the law allows Republicans to control the Senate and the judiciary, the spirit of republican government demands otherwise. The two cannot long exist in tension with each other. Though the 2020 election did not result in a blue tidal wave, it did suggest emerging Democratic majorities in formerly red states such as Arizona and Georgia. If, eventually, demographic change adds North Carolina and Texas to the mix, national elections would more accurately reflect the national popular vote. History suggests that Republicans would then pay—dearly—for their years of minority rule. If Republicans hope for greater success than their historical counterparts, they would do well to heed the message that a party cannot maintain power forever, and embark on a more genuinely collaborative and bipartisan approach to government. Short of that, they risk much more than their political careers.


A good read and an ideology that I subscribe to. Trump, McConnell, and the GOP will do everything in their power to string-out minority-power rule in the United States for as long as possible.
 

A good read and an ideology that I subscribe to. Trump, McConnell, and the GOP will do everything in their power to string-out minority-power rule in the United States for as long as possible.

1. Without how it is currently set up, there is no America. This was the contract made to unite the states into one country. We would not have had the nation we have today if not for our current dynamic. We'd be more like Europe without the EU.

2. You, and the author, have a fundamental misunderstanding of basic principles and what it is to be American. We were never meant to be a pure majority rule. Despite Democrats getting more votes, that doesn't mean all Democrats everywhere support the same positions as the most radical Democrats in California and New York. A Democrat in Georgia or Texas isn't really the same type of Democrat as Oregon or Washington.

3. You and the author don't seem to have a fundamental understanding of the rule of law. For example:

- "Policies supported by a majority of Americans in opinion polls could be ruled unconstitutional, all because a president who lost the popular vote nominated three justices, and senators representing a minority of the American population confirmed them."

Whether something is ruled constitutional or unconstitutional has absolutely nothing to do with an opinion poll. There is literally no connection there. The rules are based of of, and only based off of, whether the Constitution allows that authority to happen.

We are the Unite States of America, not the United States of California and New York.

That's just a quick brush of the many issues present here.
 
Democrats simply didnt tie trumpism to down ballot republicans. I dont care what they say in private, or that rich ghouls make easy friends. I care about what they did in the spotlight.
 
All (or most) of any potential problems in the OP could be remedied if the majority of citizens voted--but that will never happen. We have the freedom not to vote, and if we were to force people to vote, the results couldn't be considered a true reflection of the public's desires. So, the system we have now is the best system (I believe).
 




A good read and an ideology that I subscribe to. Trump, McConnell, and the GOP will do everything in their power to string-out minority-power rule in the United States for as long as possible.
yawn...

Another article from another idiot who thinks the "national popular election" is even a thing.

Moving on...
 
yawn...

Another article from another idiot who thinks the "national popular election" is even a thing.

Moving on...

Mycroft, in post 5, with the deflection.

Why on Earth do you think anyone cares when you 'dismiss' something? If it's pro-Trump, you'll slobber all over it. If it's anything else, you'll 'dismiss' it. Though usually you manage to drop the deuce in post 2.



It's as predictable as it is irrelevant. You obviously did not read the quoted text let alone the article. You don't have a clue what was actually being argued. Minority rule against majority will - especially in the Trumpist "**** you, non-Trumpist" style - does not last forever. The more extreme, the more backlash.
 
All (or most) of any potential problems in the OP could be remedied if the majority of citizens voted--but that will never happen. We have the freedom not to vote, and if we were to force people to vote, the results couldn't be considered a true reflection of the public's desires. So, the system we have now is the best system (I believe).

EmilyL:

I am confused. Could you explain to me why you conclude the bolded section of your quote above to be a valid position, please. I don't understand the thinking here. Thanks in advance.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.
 
Mycroft, in post 5, with the deflection.

Why on Earth do you think anyone cares when you 'dismiss' something? If it's pro-Trump, you'll slobber all over it. If it's anything else, you'll 'dismiss' it. Though usually you manage to drop the deuce in post 2.



It's as predictable as it is irrelevant. You obviously did not read the quoted text let alone the article. You don't have a clue what was actually being argued. Minority rule against majority will - especially in the Trumpist "**** you, non-Trumpist" style - does not last forever. The more extreme, the more backlash.
 




A good read and an ideology that I subscribe to. Trump, McConnell, and the GOP will do everything in their power to string-out minority-power rule in the United States for as long as possible.
So because Dems can't win fair and square, they support changing the rules to make sure they win.
 
EmilyL:

I am confused. Could you explain to me why you conclude the bolded section of your quote above to be a valid position, please. I don't understand the thinking here. Thanks in advance.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

Roddy, it's just my own feeling that, if people were forced to vote, those who voted only because they were forced wouldn't care who they voted for. That's because they probably wouldn't care enough to learn anything about the candidates. They'd probably vote for the person who was listed first on the ballot. I have no scientific proof of that, but I think that would probably be the case.
 
Roddy, it's just my own feeling that, if people were forced to vote, those who voted only because they were forced wouldn't care who they voted for. That's because they probably wouldn't care enough to learn anything about the candidates. They'd probably vote for the person who was listed first on the ballot. I have no scientific proof of that, but I think that would probably be the case.
One place to research would be Australia, where voting is mandatory.
 
We will never get rid of the Electoral College.
 
1. Without how it is currently set up, there is no America. This was the contract made to unite the states into one country. We would not have had the nation we have today if not for our current dynamic. We'd be more like Europe without the EU.

2. You, and the author, have a fundamental misunderstanding of basic principles and what it is to be American. We were never meant to be a pure majority rule. Despite Democrats getting more votes, that doesn't mean all Democrats everywhere support the same positions as the most radical Democrats in California and New York. A Democrat in Georgia or Texas isn't really the same type of Democrat as Oregon or Washington.

3. You and the author don't seem to have a fundamental understanding of the rule of law. For example:

- "Policies supported by a majority of Americans in opinion polls could be ruled unconstitutional, all because a president who lost the popular vote nominated three justices, and senators representing a minority of the American population confirmed them."

Whether something is ruled constitutional or unconstitutional has absolutely nothing to do with an opinion poll. There is literally no connection there. The rules are based of of, and only based off of, whether the Constitution allows that authority to happen.

We are the Unite States of America, not the United States of California and New York.

That's just a quick brush of the many issues present here.

DUMB POST

clue, it is 2020

peace
 
One place to research would be Australia, where voting is mandatory.

Thanks, Rucker--I knew there was some major country that did that, but I wasn't sure which.
 
You'd think that conservatives would be in favor of each citizen's vote being equal to the others.

They seem to think that equality is important in other areas.

In some scenarios, it is a bedrock principle for them.

But not in other scenarios.

Odd.
 




A good read and an ideology that I subscribe to. Trump, McConnell, and the GOP will do everything in their power to string-out minority-power rule in the United States for as long as possible.

The problem is the rural vs urban divide. We should let the rural areas have their rugged individualism and the cities have their social democracies.
 
You'd think that conservatives would be in favor of each citizen's vote being equal to the others.

They seem to think that equality is important in other areas.

In some scenarios, it is a bedrock principle for them.

But not in other scenarios.

Odd.

Does it make one damn bit of difference to you that the EC is codified in law? There are reasons for this that I am sure you can find if you look.
 
it will last. they're getting ready to gerrymander the living shit out of the country for the next ten years, IMO.
 
So because Dems can't win fair and square, they support changing the rules to make sure they win.
Looks like they did a pretty good job of winning fair and square about a month ago.
 
The problem is the rural vs urban divide. We should let the rural areas have their rugged individualism and the cities have their social democracies.
We all should be, and are, governed by the same Constitution. Those who don’t agree with that are free to leave, or deal with it.
 
We all should be, and are, governed by the same Constitution. Those who don’t agree with that are free to leave, or deal with it.
I agree completely! its not about rural vs urban, if the constitution was followed how its supposed to be, then you would have states where all the socialist's could move to that they could try there terrible social engineering in and watch it fail and learn from it (within the confines of the bill of rights under the 14th amendment of course), I myself would choose to move to a libertarian state like new Hampshire but that's just me, no one should try to force their political belief's on all of the states through any one size fits all plan in the federal government. What works for one state may not work for another. We should also end federal grants to the states then the voters would have to pay themselves if they want socialism
 
I agree completely! its not about rural vs urban, if the constitution was followed how its supposed to be, then you would have states where all the socialist's could move to that they could try there terrible social engineering in and watch it fail and learn from it (within the confines of the bill of rights under the 14th amendment of course), I myself would choose to move to a libertarian state like new Hampshire but that's just me, no one should try to force their political belief's on all of the states through any one size fits all plan in the federal government. What works for one state may not work for another. We should also end federal grants to the states then the voters would have to pay themselves if they want socialism
You say you agree, then go on to suggest scenarios that are completely contrary to your agreement.
 
Back
Top Bottom