The Great RW myth about the Founders' meaning of 'Republic'.

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Obviously it's not rule by majority or else Hillary would be the next prez. She's beating Trump by almost 2,000,000 votes now.

Trump: 62,238,425
Clinton: 64,156,255

2016 presidential election results

Of course it's the rule of the majority, Trump won 67% of the States, that's the majority that counts.

That's a majority of dirt, ground, geographical acres. That is meaningless to a democratic system of government.

You fucking idiot, the federal government is a representative form of government, NOT A DEMOCRATIC FORM. States elect those representatives per the Constitution, deal with it fool.

If NYcarbneer really knew anything about our American history, he would know the Founders already entertained the option of electing the president on the basis of a democratic majority vote, before considering the electoral college, and REJECTED it. Yet I'm vety certain he would not have the slightest clue as to why. These liberals really ought to open up an American history book sometime, I just can't believe how little they really know about our country.

They got the impression somewhere that if they fundamentally change it, America will become perfect. Never mind the fact that America is already better than almost every other country right now. They think they can make it better. It's a pipe-dream of course, because smarter more visionary men then they are already considered everything they're trying to do.

What they don't realize is that our Founders already debated the same issues the liberals are bringing up today, regardihg the process of how best to represent the people when electing a president. They looked to representation through those elected in Congress, a democrat majority vote on a national level, as well as an electoral college. Regardless of what they believed one Founder may have said regarding a "pure" system that accurately represents the interests of the people, the Founders collectively decided that an electoral college best represents all the concerns they had hoped to solve.

Now the only reason we have this thread regarding the election process of the presidency, is because they don't really know what those concerns actually are the Founders were referring to and hoped to solve. Their refusal to answer a question directly imposed to them only adds further proof, that many unfortunately simply do not know the history behind how our Constitution and how the Founders came to choose this particular form of government.

 

[Pop23]

I love this.

Gays want a democracy, but would be crushed if a true democracy was put in place.

Blacks want a democracy, but would be crushed if a true democracy was put in place.

Pro abortion advocates want a democracy, but would be crushed if a true democracy was put in place.

Honestly, get over it, a republic serves the needs of minority groups best.

You can't make this shit up folks.

 

[Zoom-boing]

But it's more accurate to say we're a republic.

And to the Republic, for which it stands.

Uh, the point of the OP is that Jefferson used the two terms interchangeably.

Then saying we're a representative republic isn't wrong. Derp.

 

[paperview]

But it's more accurate to say we're a republic.

And to the Republic, for which it stands.

Uh, the point of the OP is that Jefferson used the two terms interchangeably.

Then saying we're a representative republic isn't wrong. Derp.

"representative republic" is redundant.

 

[Moonglow]

We were modeled on the Roman Republic; we're Rome

And you're a freeman with client responsibilities to your patron...

 

[Zoom-boing]

But it's more accurate to say we're a republic.

And to the Republic, for which it stands.

Uh, the point of the OP is that Jefferson used the two terms interchangeably.

Then saying we're a representative republic isn't wrong. Derp.

"representative republic" is redundant.

No it's not.

Representative democracy (also indirect democracy, representative republic, or psephocracy) is a type of democracy founded on the principle of elected officials representing a group of people, as opposed to direct democracy.

Representative democracy - Wikipedia

 

[NYcarbineer]

But it's more accurate to say we're a republic.

And to the Republic, for which it stands.

Uh, the point of the OP is that Jefferson used the two terms interchangeably.

Then saying we're a representative republic isn't wrong. Derp.

"representative republic" is redundant.

No it's not.

Representative democracy (also indirect democracy, representative republic, or psephocracy) is a type of democracy founded on the principle of elected officials representing a group of people, as opposed to direct democracy.

Representative democracy - Wikipedia

Yes. That is the correct definition that a dozen RW'ers in this thread are denying is the correct definition.

 

[Zoom-boing]

But it's more accurate to say we're a republic.

And to the Republic, for which it stands.

Uh, the point of the OP is that Jefferson used the two terms interchangeably.

Then saying we're a representative republic isn't wrong. Derp.

"representative republic" is redundant.

No it's not.

Representative democracy (also indirect democracy, representative republic, or psephocracy) is a type of democracy founded on the principle of elected officials representing a group of people, as opposed to direct democracy.

Representative democracy - Wikipedia

Yes. That is the correct definition that a dozen RW'ers in this thread are denying is the correct definition.

Well then they should stop doing that because they're wrong.

 

[Wyatt earp]

But it's more accurate to say we're a republic.

And to the Republic, for which it stands.

Uh, the point of the OP is that Jefferson used the two terms interchangeably.

Then saying we're a representative republic isn't wrong. Derp.

"representative republic" is redundant.

No it's not.

Representative democracy (also indirect democracy, representative republic, or psephocracy) is a type of democracy founded on the principle of elected officials representing a group of people, as opposed to direct democracy.

Representative democracy - Wikipedia

Yes. That is the correct definition that a dozen RW'ers in this thread are denying is the correct definition.

Constitutional republic

 

[NYcarbineer]

Uh, the point of the OP is that Jefferson used the two terms interchangeably.

Then saying we're a representative republic isn't wrong. Derp.

"representative republic" is redundant.

No it's not.

Representative democracy (also indirect democracy, representative republic, or psephocracy) is a type of democracy founded on the principle of elected officials representing a group of people, as opposed to direct democracy.

Representative democracy - Wikipedia

Yes. That is the correct definition that a dozen RW'ers in this thread are denying is the correct definition.

Well then they should stop doing that because they're wrong.

They aren't allowed to stop because the Master won't permit it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The key objection to 'democracy' as RW'ers define it is their label that it's 'mob rule'.

Translation: too many Americans allowed to share the power of our governments. Government by the People is bad. Government by a select few of the People is good.

 

[Pop23]

Has it occurred to anyone else that the reason so many democrats are advocating for democracy is they are tired of being shackled by minority groups?

In a democracy the minority populations mean almost zip.

They can throw gays, blacks and hispanics under the bus and say it's just the system working the way it should.

They will throw them under the bus anyway, this way is just a bit less messy.

 

[Pop23]

The key objection to 'democracy' as RW'ers define it is their label that it's 'mob rule'.

Translation: too many Americans allowed to share the power of our governments. Government by the People is bad. Government by a select few of the People is good.

And that democracy is inherently evil toward minority populations. Maybe that's why you fight for it so hard?

 

[NYcarbineer]

The key objection to 'democracy' as RW'ers define it is their label that it's 'mob rule'.

Translation: too many Americans allowed to share the power of our governments. Government by the People is bad. Government by a select few of the People is good.

And that democracy is inherently evil toward minority populations. Maybe that's why you fight for it so hard?

You're an idiot. How does that work? Democracy evil towards minorities.

 

[Pop23]

The key objection to 'democracy' as RW'ers define it is their label that it's 'mob rule'.

Translation: too many Americans allowed to share the power of our governments. Government by the People is bad. Government by a select few of the People is good.

And that democracy is inherently evil toward minority populations. Maybe that's why you fight for it so hard?

You're an idiot. How does that work? Democracy evil towards minorities.

The majority becomes self serving. That's democracy dim wit.

Do you even realize what majority rules means?

 

[NYcarbineer]

The key objection to 'democracy' as RW'ers define it is their label that it's 'mob rule'.

Translation: too many Americans allowed to share the power of our governments. Government by the People is bad. Government by a select few of the People is good.

And that democracy is inherently evil toward minority populations. Maybe that's why you fight for it so hard?

You're an idiot. How does that work? Democracy evil towards minorities.

The majority becomes self serving. That's democracy dim wit.

Do you even realize what majority rules means?

So ideally when a bill goes through Congress, if only a minority of legislators vote for it,

it should become law?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

We hear it all the time. The founders didn't want democracy; they wanted a 'republic'. The distinction is usually made by conservatives to defend any undemocratic aspects of our system of government -

those that just so happen to suit the conservative agenda.

Well, how about we hear what a real founding father really said about this thing 'republic'.

Thomas Jefferson:

"It must be acknowledged that the term republic is of very vague application in every language... Were I to assign to this term a precise and definite idea,

I would say purely and simply it means a government by its citizens in mass, acting directly and personally according to rules established by the majority; and that every other government is more or less republican in proportion as it has in its composition more or less of this ingredient of direct action of the citizens.

Such a government is evidently restrained to very narrow limits of space and population. I doubt if it would be practicable beyond the extent of a New England township." --Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, 1816. ME 15:19

Get it? Jefferson EQUATES 'republic' to 'direct democracy', with only the caveat that a direct democracy becomes impractical in larger areas of space and population.

Never does he say that democracy and republic are distinct or separate entities.

Jefferson again:

"A democracy [is] the only pure republic, but impracticable beyond the limits of a town." --Thomas Jefferson to Isaac H. Tiffany, 1816. ME 15:65

.Once again, he does NOT differentiate between democracy and republic,

he equates them.

And Jefferson continues:

"The first shade from this pure element which, like that of pure vital air cannot sustain life of itself, would be where the powers of the government, being divided, should be exercised each by representatives chosen either pro hac vice, or for such short terms as should render secure the duty of expressing the will of their constituents. This I should consider as the nearest approach to a pure republic which is practicable on a large scale of country or population.

There he explains how a representative democracy, or republic, should function, when a pure (direct) democracy, aka a republic, is impractical.

And one more...

"We may say with truth and meaning that governments are more or less republican as they have more or less of the element of popular election and control in their composition..." Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, 1816. ME 15:23

I suggest that before certain people spout off about what the founders believed, they actually find out what the founders believed.

Jefferson on Politics & Government: Republican Principles

Hillary lost. Get over it and move on with your life.

 

[Pop23]

The key objection to 'democracy' as RW'ers define it is their label that it's 'mob rule'.

Translation: too many Americans allowed to share the power of our governments. Government by the People is bad. Government by a select few of the People is good.

And that democracy is inherently evil toward minority populations. Maybe that's why you fight for it so hard?

You're an idiot. How does that work? Democracy evil towards minorities.

The majority becomes self serving. That's democracy dim wit.

Do you even realize what majority rules means?

So ideally when a bill goes through Congress, if only a minority of legislators vote for it,

it should become law?

You're a child aren't you?

The whole "checks and balances" issue flys out the window in a democracy.

All of it dimwit.

 

[NYcarbineer]

We hear it all the time. The founders didn't want democracy; they wanted a 'republic'. The distinction is usually made by conservatives to defend any undemocratic aspects of our system of government -

those that just so happen to suit the conservative agenda.

Well, how about we hear what a real founding father really said about this thing 'republic'.

Thomas Jefferson:

"It must be acknowledged that the term republic is of very vague application in every language... Were I to assign to this term a precise and definite idea,

I would say purely and simply it means a government by its citizens in mass, acting directly and personally according to rules established by the majority; and that every other government is more or less republican in proportion as it has in its composition more or less of this ingredient of direct action of the citizens.

Such a government is evidently restrained to very narrow limits of space and population. I doubt if it would be practicable beyond the extent of a New England township." --Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, 1816. ME 15:19

Get it? Jefferson EQUATES 'republic' to 'direct democracy', with only the caveat that a direct democracy becomes impractical in larger areas of space and population.

Never does he say that democracy and republic are distinct or separate entities.

Jefferson again:

"A democracy [is] the only pure republic, but impracticable beyond the limits of a town." --Thomas Jefferson to Isaac H. Tiffany, 1816. ME 15:65

.Once again, he does NOT differentiate between democracy and republic,

he equates them.

And Jefferson continues:

"The first shade from this pure element which, like that of pure vital air cannot sustain life of itself, would be where the powers of the government, being divided, should be exercised each by representatives chosen either pro hac vice, or for such short terms as should render secure the duty of expressing the will of their constituents. This I should consider as the nearest approach to a pure republic which is practicable on a large scale of country or population.

There he explains how a representative democracy, or republic, should function, when a pure (direct) democracy, aka a republic, is impractical.

And one more...

"We may say with truth and meaning that governments are more or less republican as they have more or less of the element of popular election and control in their composition..." Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, 1816. ME 15:23

I suggest that before certain people spout off about what the founders believed, they actually find out what the founders believed.

Jefferson on Politics & Government: Republican Principles

Hillary lost. Get over it and move on with your life.

off topic personal attack lol.

This thread isn't about Hillary.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The key objection to 'democracy' as RW'ers define it is their label that it's 'mob rule'.

Translation: too many Americans allowed to share the power of our governments. Government by the People is bad. Government by a select few of the People is good.

And that democracy is inherently evil toward minority populations. Maybe that's why you fight for it so hard?

You're an idiot. How does that work? Democracy evil towards minorities.

The majority becomes self serving. That's democracy dim wit.

Do you even realize what majority rules means?

So ideally when a bill goes through Congress, if only a minority of legislators vote for it,

it should become law?

You're a child aren't you?

The whole "checks and balances" issue flys out the window in a democracy.

All of it dimwit.

Why? The majority can't legislate a judiciary? An executive? Laws that protect rights?