Converation thread

“So then smaller states with smaller populations just get no say”

No, it just means all people would get an equal say; under the electoral college, people in smaller states are given a larger "say" than people in larger states...which is blatantly anti-democratic. If some people have more of a say than others, then that's not democratic, that's just inflating the beliefs of a minority simply because they're in a minority. Everyone should have the same, equal vote, and if that means a minority belief is unpopular...then that's just how majoritarianism works. Plus, smaller states/towns always have their own local elections anyways, so I don't even understand the issue? If the majority of the country votes for Party A, then that's obviously who should lead nationally, but if your small state/town votes majority Party B, then your state/town should be lead by Party B...

I am strongly Anti-Democratic and darn proud of it because I AM A REPUBLICAN NOT A DEMOCRAT!

I can't tell if you're joking or not, but the political party names are not actually representative of being pro-/anti-democracy.

More importantly, why are you strongly against democratic decision-making? So that implies that you believe that not everyone should be allowed to vote, right?

Absolutely. So Democracy is majority tyranny. What I believe in is a Republic, which our nation, by the way, actually is -- and that means that consent of the governed is retained while individual rights, being uninfringable and inalienable, cannot be voted away by mob rule. Actually the party names are representative of being pro/anti-democracy. Republicans were founded to abolish slavery because they knew that just because the voters said slavery was right didn't make it legal. Democrats were founded to protect the institution of slavery and racism because that's what the majority wanted. So yes the parties are an anti/pro democratic system.

Except that's not true. The Republican Party originally got it's name from the anti-monarchist sentiments of the French Revolution; in fact, the original party name was Democratic-Republicans until the party ended up splitting into eventually just Democrats and Republicans. Neither party was created for, nor representative of, the systems of government "Republic" and "Democracy". Both parties are pro-Republic, and their differences are based on how much power the federal/state governments should hold, not on entire systems of governance.

Secondly, I'm not…  Read more sure you understand what a Democracy/Republic means..? A democracy simply means that all people share an equal say in a decision-making process, whereas a republic simply means that only a select few hold decision-making power over the entire population. What you're advocating for is simply an oligarchy.

Except that is true. Do you know a single thing about our history? Republicans, Whigs, and Federalists (the GOP's precursers) all hated the French Revolution and weren't shy about saying it. The name was actually borrowed from Thomas Jefferson's "Republican Party" of the 1790s. I don't trust any of your historical insights now, that's for sure, because obviously you don't know history!

I apologize if my previous historical interpretation was inaccurate. However, going back to the topic of the electoral college, I believe it's essential to focus on finding a balance between preserving individual rights and maintaining a fair representation for all citizens. As we discuss the merits and drawbacks of the electoral college, let's consider the implications of any proposed changes while acknowledging that our understanding of history can shape our perspectives. What are your thoughts on finding a balance between these two aspects of our democratic system?