We don't elect Presidents by majority rule in this country. We're a nation of states. A Republic. Moron.
Can we agree that you prefer rule by the minority over the majority? Isn't that the definition of tyranny?
Our republican form of government was designed to protect the rights of the minority and that is a good ideal. It was not meant to have minority rule, that is the very opposite of a democracy.
I don't prefer anyone to rule. Our Constitution doesn't permit rulers. We are governed by the consent of the people. The minority in power right now isn't conservative. You idiots just don't get it. You're stupid.
No matter what you prefer, our Constitution spells out how this country is ruled. You are also wrong when you said "We are governed by the consent of the people". In fact we are governed by the consent of the States, the people take second place. How long the people will put up with this situation is debatable.
Semantics. The Presidency is the only election determined by the states.
Except it is not:
The U.S. Senate, as you know, is currently divided 50-50 along party lines, thanks to the impressive double win in Georgia, and counting the two technically “independent” senators as Democrats, since they caucus with the Democrats.
But, according to the calculation of Ian Millhiser, writing for Vox, if you add up the population of states and assign half to each of their two senators, “the Democratic half of the Senate represents 41,549,808 more people than the Republican half.”
Yeah, so? The Constitution states that there shall be two Senators from each state. What's your point other than you don't like the US Constitution.
The Constitution is over 200 years old and it is showing its age. America has changed, the Constitution has not kept up. Don't be surprised when there is popular support for packing the SCOTUS, removing the filibuster, or changing the Electoral College and
Senate.
Human nature has not changed since the dawn of man, half of it is ugly, evil, and needs to be kept harnessed, and the US Constitution is the first thing mankind has done that has worked to keep it somewhat in check. It's not going anywhere any time soon.
Everything changes, even human 'nature' (really human culture). Continuous change is evolution and that is a positive. If we refuse to change the Constitution, eventually it will break, that is revolution and that is dangerous.
Human nature has never 'evolved' and it never will. Why don't you hold your breath waiting for greed, envy, sloth, gluttony, vanity, jealousy, narcissism, ego, laziness, anger, pride, et all to be 'cultured' out of the human race?
Nail on the head!!
The number one lie of every totalitarian is that they will change human nature.
1.The Constitution commemorates our revolution, and, as Madison states in the ‘Federalist,’ is the greatest of all reflections on human nature…human beings are not angels.”
a. Humans are not perfectible, but are capable of self government. The republican form of government presupposes this idea of humans. Our government is not a controlling government, but must itself be controlled: by the Constitution.
b. Communist Revolution is based on the idea of transforming human nature. “The
New Soviet man or
New Soviet person (
Russian: новый советский человек), as postulated by the ideologists of the
Communist Party of the Soviet Union, was an
archetype of a person with certain qualities that were said to be emerging as dominant among all citizens of the
Soviet Union, irrespective of the country's long-standing cultural, ethnic, and linguistic diversity, creating a single
Soviet people,
Soviet nation.
[1]
en.wikipedia.org
Leon Trotsky wrote in his
Literature and Revolution [2] :
"The human species, the sluggish Homo sapiens, will once again enter the stage of radical reconstruction and become in his own hands the object of the most complex methods of artificial selection and psychophysical training... Man will make it his goal...to create a higher sociobiological type, a superman, if you will"
New Soviet man - Wikipedia
The birth of "The New Soviet Man" was the stated aim of Marxism, breeding a new evolutionary form of human being who will think, look, and act differently. The next footage was the Nazi attempt to do exactly the same thing: in German, "We must create a new man! A new life form should appear!"
"In both systems we have the ideology of creating a new man. Both systems don't agree with human nature as it is...they are at war with human nature. Both are based on false biology, and false sociology."
Françoise Thom, professor of Soviet history, Sorbonne, Paris
“Phrases like “rebellion against authority,” “revolution in education,” “destroying an old world so a new one could be born,” and “creating new man”—all of which attracted many in the West in the 1960s—were interpreted as calls for violent action. Mao understood the latent violence of the young, and said that since they were well fed and had had their lessons stopped, they could easily be stirred up and use their boundless energy to go out and wreak havoc.” Chang, “Wild Swans”
"He exploded: "You Capitalists always talk about 'human nature;' but there is no such thing. Human beings are what you make them. Capitalism makes them acquisitive, selfish; it inevitably produces clashes and WAR. Communism makes persons selfless, with concern not for themselves as individuals, but for the whole society-the masses. Thus, Communism won't lead to clashes-and the whole world at last will have PEACE!"
The Schwarz Report | Essays
In 1969, Hillary Rodham gave the student commencement address at Wellesley in which she said that “ for too long our leaders have used politics as the art of making what appears to be impossible, possible….We’re not interested in social reconstruction; it’s human reconstruction.”
-http://www.wellesley.edu/PublicAffairs/Commencement/1969/053169hillary.html_____