Debate Now The case for expanding the Supreme Court

[The Sage of Main Street]

The terms 'representative democracy' and 'constitutional republic' are not mutually exclusive terms.

What was true in the early 19th century isn't necessaril;y true to today. THere is no inherent oblgiation to cling to the original design, which is why they allowed the constitution to be amended.


America is a representative democracy.

America is all about elections, and the vast majority of elections held in America are DIRECT

Direct voting is held on:

congresspersons
Senators.
Governors
Mayors
Municipal and state office holders of various types.
State Ballot initiatives.

The ONLY elections that are not direct are for legislation and the president.

However, in many states, they have direct democracy on laws called 'ballot initiatives'.

Wherever you have a nation with that many elections you have....(drum roll)............................


A democracy!!!!

Elected and Elitist Come From the Same Word

 

[Cellblock2429]

That's not an argument.

/—-/ I know. It’s a statement of fact democRATs need to rig everything in their favor.

 

[HikerGuy83]

With a small court, it puts too much power in the one or two swing votes. With a bigger number, it gives more incentive for consensus building, and it would be structured so that the dominant side should be plus one justice, and never 6/3, that's just wrong.

Here is your rule #2.

2. If you make a claim of fact, offer a thoughtful path of reasoning/logic, AND, if possible, links to authoritative sources that supplement (they don't have to actually prove, but proof is always preferred) your position. If you can't do this, then preface it with 'imo' (in my opinion).

Please prove your point....why is it wrong. Whose going to structure what ? You are making stuff up. That is no argument.

You are just wrong.

 

[dblack]

The argument for court-packing is, essentially, the same as the argument for getting rid of the electoral college: "Our side is losing and we'd like to change the rules so that we're not."

 

[Rumpole]

/—-/ I know. It’s a statement of fact democRATs need to rig everything in their favor.

Making a vacuous claim without substantiation is not an argument.

It's an empty opinion, and empty opinions, well, who the fuck cares?

Certainly not I.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Making a vacuous claim without substantiation is not an argument.

It's an empty opinion, and empty opinions, well, who the fuck cares?

Certainly not I.

Still not following your own rules.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Making a vacuous claim without substantiation is not an argument.

It's an empty opinion, and empty opinions, well, who the fuck cares?

Certainly not I.

/—-/ Threatening to stack the court, kicking Trump off ballots, early voting, mail in voting… Yeah it’s the only way you can win.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Making a vacuous claim without substantiation is not an argument.

It's an empty opinion, and empty opinions, well, who the fuck cares?

Certainly not I.

/——/ Here, Rumphole. More proof your side has to cheat to win.