Well over half of Americans believe democracy will cease to be in the US.

[Votto]

Poll: Half of Americans now predict U.S. may 'cease to be a democracy' someday

A new Yahoo News/YouGov poll shows that most Democrats (55%) and Republicans (53%) now believe it is “likely” that America will “cease to be a democracy in the future” — a stunning expression of bipartisan despair about the direction of the country.

www.yahoo.com

But educated people know that the US was never a democracy

Sane and educated people will know that just because the DNC does not get their way, whether it comes to election reform or democrats losing office, that this does not mean we live in a government devoid of elements of democracy. But thanks to a Left wing government run education system, most Americans don't know these things and probably never will. In fact, it just may be that "the people" are sick to death of those democrats they have elected, granted those that are can be labeled racist, bigoted, homophobic, woman haters who are anti-Semitic, but I think that is only common sense.

Now as far as the US becoming a complete totalitarian state, which should have been the real question from a media devoid of an education and the truth, what say you? Is it inevitable?

Some who founded the country thought so such as Ben Franklin

“I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such: because I think a General Government necessary for us, and there is no Form of Government but what may be a Blessing to the People if well-administred; and I believe farther that this is likely to be well administred for a Course of Years and can only end in Despotism as other Forms have done before it, when the People shall become so corrupted as to need Despotic Government, being incapable of any other.”​

I happen to agree with Franklin, and is why I think those on the Left have focused more on destroying morality with society than anything else, it is to usher in despotism.

 

[Sunsettommy]

There is a difference between Republic and Democracy, yet most people think the wrong word so much which is a testament of the public education system failures.

 

[Votto]

There is a difference between Republic and Democracy, yet most people think the wrong word so much which is a testament of the public education system failures.

That the media constantly reinforces, like in this news article

In fact, you hear the same things from democrats in power, constantly referring to the US as a democracy

It is intentional false propaganda.

More importantly, it divorces the fears of mob rule that the Founding Fathers had regarding democracy and what democrats want to usher in.

Most importantly, however, this type of article is designed to evoke emotion, not intellect

This is the bread and butter of despotic rule.

 

[MarathonMike]

Now as far as the US becoming a complete totalitarian state, which should have been the real question from a media devoid of an education and the truth, what say you? Is it inevitable?

If the Democrats are successful is in shifting the demographics of the swing states through open border policies, then we will have perpetual One Party Rule. They really only need Texas and Florida and it's game over. A Totalitarian State is always the end result of One Party Rule.

 

[progressive hunter]

There is a difference between Republic and Democracy, yet most people think the wrong word so much which is a testament of the public education system failures.

the reason the progs keep saying democracy is to make the weak minded think they are the ones that make the rules,, if they said constitutional republic like they are supposed to, people would know the constitution sets the rules,,

 

[task0778]

I think we should focus less on the word "democracy", and more on what the real message is. Namely that we could be headed for a country wherein the barest majority can do whatever they want to and the minority party would be powerless to stop them. And with that bare majority they could pack the Supreme Court, federalize the election laws to the majority's favor, and generally change the face of gov't to ensure as much as possible their continued power. Our elections wouldn't be the voice of the electorate any more, the system would be corrupted not unlike what happens in a 3rd world country or places like Russia, China, and North Korea. Some say we're already at that point and it ain't just a few discontents either, as the poll shows.

Technically, a 50-50 vote with a tie-breaker vote from the VP is a democracy, but there was a reason why the US Senate was created to require a larger majority to pass anything. The idea was to almost force some bipartisanship, trying to give the minority party some control. But obviously both parties have abused that, so here we are.

 

[Thinker101]

 

[Votto]

Can democracy exist IF:

1. We live in a society where politicians and the media are allowed to lie to them 24/7 with impunity? How do you know what you are even voting for if so?

2. The state run education system barely meets standards to teach children to read, if that. How will you even be able to think critically about being lied to and what to do about it?

At the end of the day, those in power control the media and education system, thus directs them to tell people how to vote, or even inform them of who is running.

Moreover, it is to the point now that people have been directed to focus only on who is President. Both the media and academia focus only on the Oval office. The result? The result is that most have no idea who their Congressman is, or who their governor is, etc. This means they only show up for Presidential elections and probably most only vote for who is running for President. They have been brainwashed to think that Federalism does not exist, that is, a system of divided power. No, Progressives want people to believe that the President runs the whole show, as they take steps to increase the size and scope of the Executive branch so that they really are running everything now. The Executive branch now controls everything from who educates your children in school to what doctor you see. This is not how things were set up and why half the country wants to secede from the union every Presidential election. They also want an army of bureaucrats within the Executive Branch to write laws which are just glorified lies, only, these people are not elected.

Yes friends, it is the DNC that has brought us back to king rule full circle. That is called collectivism.

 

[whitehall]

It depends on how the poll was worded. Like a trial lawyer who never asks a question he doesn't already know the answer to, it's likely the left leaning Yahoo scripted the question to get the answer they wanted and spun the results. Republicans probably thought they were predicting how the Country would be under a endless democrat agenda and democrats probably don't like democracy anyway.

 

[Curried Goats]

Poll: Half of Americans now predict U.S. may 'cease to be a democracy' someday

A new Yahoo News/YouGov poll shows that most Democrats (55%) and Republicans (53%) now believe it is “likely” that America will “cease to be a democracy in the future” — a stunning expression of bipartisan despair about the direction of the country.

www.yahoo.com

But educated people know that the US was never a democracy

Sane and educated people will know that just because the DNC does not get their way, whether it comes to election reform or democrats losing office, that this does not mean we live in a government devoid of elements of democracy. But thanks to a Left wing government run education system, most Americans don't know these things and probably never will. In fact, it just may be that "the people" are sick to death of those democrats they have elected, granted those that are can be labeled racist, bigoted, homophobic, woman haters who are anti-Semitic, but I think that is only common sense.

Now as far as the US becoming a complete totalitarian state, which should have been the real question from a media devoid of an education and the truth, what say you? Is it inevitable?

Some who founded the country thought so such as Ben Franklin

“I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such: because I think a General Government necessary for us, and there is no Form of Government but what may be a Blessing to the People if well-administred; and I believe farther that this is likely to be well administred for a Course of Years and can only end in Despotism as other Forms have done before it, when the People shall become so corrupted as to need Despotic Government, being incapable of any other.”​

I happen to agree with Franklin, and is why I think those on the Left have focused more on destroying morality with society than anything else, it is to usher in despotism.

Fuck you and old Benjamin's morality. That original constitution permitted slavery. It doesn't get much more immoral or anti-democratic than that.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Fuck you and old Benjamin's morality. That original constitution permitted slavery. It doesn't get much more immoral or anti-democratic than that.

Where in the constitution permitted slavery?

I think you are confusing it with the Declaration of Independence.

 

[Votto]

If the Democrats are successful is in shifting the demographics of the swing states through open border policies, then we will have perpetual One Party Rule. They really only need Texas and Florida and it's game over. A Totalitarian State is always the end result of One Party Rule.

Yes, and everything is about "the party"

 

[Votto]

Fuck you and old Benjamin's morality. That original constitution permitted slavery. It doesn't get much more immoral or anti-democratic than that.

There is more slavery in the world today than there ever has been in human history despite it being against the law today.

Why is that do you think? Do people have morality or less of it?

And do our laws change this?

Don't forget, those "white racists" sent white brother to fight and kill white brother to end it.

People of today would never make such a sacrifice to end abject evil.

 

[Curried Goats]

Where in the constitution permitted slavery?

I think you are confusing it with the Declaration of Independence.

No. I'm referring to the Constitution. You do remember the part about it counting non free persons as 3/5s of a person for the purpose is taxation and increasing the political representation of slave owners, rather than slaves.

 

[Sunsettommy]

No. I'm referring to the Constitution. You do remember the part about it counting non free persons as 3/5s of a person for the purpose is taxation and increasing the political representation of slave owners, rather than slaves.

LOL, that is acknowledging the existence of slavery not permitting it since you didn't show they established it was about vote apportionment to get the Southern states to ratify the document.

ConstitutionUs

What is the 3/5 Compromise?​

Excerpt:

The three-fifths compromise is an infamous passage in the US Constitution.

The constitutional conventional introduced this compromise as a way of bridging the interests of Southern and Northern states. This compromise proved to be a temporary measure.

What was the 3/5 compromise?

The 3/5 compromise meant that slaves had 3/5 of a vote in elections.

What Is The Three-Fifths Compromise?​

Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 of the US Constitution outlines how representatives and taxes must be split between states. The compromise itself is the phrase

“three fifths of all other Persons,”

meaning that every five slaves in a state would count as three free people to determine how many congresspeople a state would be allotted.

 

[Curried Goats]

There is more slavery in the world today than there ever has been in human history despite it being against the law today.

Because there are more people.

Why is that do you think? Do people have morality or less of it?

I don't know what it means to have less morality. Different people have different morals.

And do our laws change this?

Don't forget, those "white racists" sent white brother to fight and kill white brother to end it.

If you've been beating your wife your entire marriage do you expect a pat on the back when at your 100th wedding anniversary you stop?

People of today would never make such a sacrifice to end abject evil.

Projection?

 

[Curried Goats]

LOL, that is acknowledging the existence of slavery not permitting it since you didn't show they established it was about vote apportionment to get the Southern states to ratify the document.

ConstitutionUs

What is the 3/5 Compromise?​

Excerpt:

The three-fifths compromise is an infamous passage in the US Constitution.

The constitutional conventional introduced this compromise as a way of bridging the interests of Southern and Northern states. This compromise proved to be a temporary measure.

What was the 3/5 compromise?

The 3/5 compromise meant that slaves had 3/5 of a vote in elections.

What Is The Three-Fifths Compromise?​

Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 of the US Constitution outlines how representatives and taxes must be split between states. The compromise itself is the phrase


meaning that every five slaves in a state would count as three free people to determine how many congresspeople a state would be allotted.

How is giving southern slave states a political handicap, determined by the number of slaves they own, not a permission of slavery?

Did they fight Southern slavers to the death or did they capitulate to them in order to form a government with them?

 

[Sunsettommy]

How is giving southern slave states a political handicap, determined by the number of slaves they own, not a permission of slavery?

Did they fight Southern slavers to the death or did they capitulate to them in order to form a government with them?

Slavery was already in existence the South wanted to keep which is why the 3/5 was created to protect their representation power in the congress which is explained in my link you didn't read:

The Legacy of the Three-Fifths Compromise​

Disproportionate Representation of Southern States​

Armed with census data, historians have examined the effects of the three-fifths compromise on the nation’s history.

By removing congressional seats earned based on slaves, it’s possible to estimate how different events could have played out with a slightly different vote count.

Notably, southern states would have been outvoted in the House nearly immediately.

In 1793, for example, slave states had 47 of 105 congress seats. Without the three-fifths compromise, this number would have been reduced to 33. In 1812, Southern states had a thin majority of 76 out of 143 seats. Again, without the compromise, they’d have been a minority of 59.

bolding mine

 

[Curried Goats]

Slavery was already in existence the South wanted to keep which is why the 3/5 was created to protect their representation power in the congress which is explained in my link you didn't read:

The Legacy of the Three-Fifths Compromise​

Disproportionate Representation of Southern States​

Armed with census data, historians have examined the effects of the three-fifths compromise on the nation’s history.

By removing congressional seats earned based on slaves, it’s possible to estimate how different events could have played out with a slightly different vote count.

Notably, southern states would have been outvoted in the House nearly immediately.

In 1793, for example, slave states had 47 of 105 congress seats. Without the three-fifths compromise, this number would have been reduced to 33. In 1812, Southern states had a thin majority of 76 out of 143 seats. Again, without the compromise, they’d have been a minority of 59.

bolding mine

You are only further proving my point. Not only did America not fight slavery to the death it gave slave states a political advantage determined by how many slaves they owned. That is an example of America not only permitting slavery, but also rewarding it you stupid twat.

 

[Sunsettommy]

You are only further proving my point. Not only did America not fight slavery to the death it gave slave states a political advantage determined by how many slaves they owned. That is an example of America not only permitting slavery, but also rewarding it you stupid twat.

Are you really that stupid since SLAVERY was already in place? for many decades but now that a NATIONAL government was to be established, they had to get the South on board thus a compromise was made that made it possible for the Constitution to be ratified.

Since Slaves were not counted as citizens the south needed the 3/5 compromise to have 60% of the slaves counted as population yet even this was not full representation of the population in the south.

What Is The Three-Fifths Compromise?​

Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 of the US Constitution outlines how representatives and taxes must be split between states. The compromise itself is the phrase

“three fifths of all other Persons,”

meaning that every five slaves in a state would count as three free people to determine how many congresspeople a state would be allotted.

Over all the south because they wanted to keep slavery actually LOST representation power.

Think Goats THINK!