America's democracy.

[M3ntally-Unstable]

One of the major problems with democracy (and today's "get out the vote" movements), is that a large majority of the people are uninformed about the issues. It is technically a citizen's duty to be "informed," but in this modern day and age, i'd be suprised if five percent of us are.
Mostly all of our news is biased on some level, and it's almost impossible to tell what the hell our politicians are actually doing. Could it be because they are mimicking America's people?
Is our problem not actually politics, but that most people in our country are really dumb?

[Me-Patch]

Ever hear of of the electoral college.

[fahrenheit]

At 6/10/07 05:07 PM, Me-Patch wrote: Ever hear of of the electoral college.

whats does that have to do with anything?

[Me-Patch]

At 6/10/07 05:12 PM, fahrenheit wrote:

At 6/10/07 05:07 PM, Me-Patch wrote: Ever hear of of the electoral college.

whats does that have to do with anything?

He says he doesn't think the American people are intellegent enough to have full democratic authority, that would be the reason why the electoral college was set in place by our founding fathers.

[Bolo]

At 6/10/07 05:07 PM, Me-Patch wrote: Ever hear of of the electoral college.

The worst electoral system ever devised by American democracy?

[Me-Patch]

At 6/10/07 05:15 PM, Bolo wrote:

At 6/10/07 05:07 PM, Me-Patch wrote: Ever hear of of the electoral college.

The worst electoral system ever devised by American democracy?

I ain't arguing that it's an insulting system that undermines the entire concept of a democratic society, I'm just saying it solves all the problems that the topic starter is so worried about.

[SyntheticTacos]

At 6/10/07 05:15 PM, Bolo wrote:

At 6/10/07 05:07 PM, Me-Patch wrote: Ever hear of of the electoral college.

The worst electoral system ever devised by American democracy?

The thing that got Bush elected even though Gore won the popular vote? The thing that was created because BEFORE in the 1700s it was much harder to disseminate information? The thing that isn't really relevant now?

[ForkRobotik]

I always found it funny when americans bitched about affirmative action, and how the "best man" should always get the job, yet when it comes to your government, it's not about giving the "best" man the job.
Infact, there's not even a debate about what kind of people should be running your country. You have two parties that slap a candidate in your face. Once says slow down, the other says speed up, and based on how likeable they are you give them the most important job in your country. It's really kindof sad...

[K-RadPie]

ForkRobotik, your country isn't any different.

[ForkRobotik]

At 6/11/07 09:52 PM, K-RadPie wrote: ForkRobotik, your country isn't any different.

What does that have to do with anything? Also, the system in my country is fairly different from the american one.

[ZombieSlayer54]

It's not a democracy. It's a republic.

Get over it.

[cellardoor6]

At 6/11/07 09:22 PM, ForkRobotik wrote: I always found it funny when americans bitched about affirmative action, and how the "best man" should always get the job, yet when it comes to your government, it's not about giving the "best" man the job.

Please tell me you're not THAT dumb...

There is no definite factor to determine who the "best" person is for a government position. The way people get jobs in our government is by either being voted for or being appointed by people who are voted for. The "best" politician is one who best represents the people they serve. Non-administrative and non-legislative Ministers and Secretaries in the US are appointed by people who are VOTED for, that is how our system works.

A less-qualified person who represents democracy may not be as educated as a dictator, but if the PEOPLE want a democracy, the "best" politician for them at the time is one who embodies their political views. People shouldn't care if someone might have more credentials if that person doesn't represent the will of the people at that time.

That is ENTIRELY unrelated to affirmative action. Businesses and schools aren't democracies, they are private companies owned by private citizens, not the government. They don't vote for the employees they hire or the students they enroll. Just like people in a household don't have to vote, the person who owns the house makes the rules.

Affirmative action is an example of the government intruding into people's lives, into the private sphere of our country. What it constitutes is basically forcing a PRIVATE company or PRIVATE school to hire/accept people who are less qualified just because they belong to a certain minority group. That is actually called discrimination, it is reverse-discrimination. It's an example of the government forcing itself on the people, that's why the majority of Americans are against it.

The GOVERNMENT is not a private company, it belongs to the entire US. Therefore they HAVE to put in place people who Americans VOTE for. Therefore nobody other than the PEOPLE gets to decide who is 'best'.

Your stupidity never ceases to amaze me, how you could juxtapose those two entirely separate issues just makes you look like a complete moron.

Infact, there's not even a debate about what kind of people should be running your country. You have two parties that slap a candidate in your face.

Haha that's coming from a Canadian whose country doesn't even vote for their head of government, and whose official head of state today, in the 21st century, is the Queen of England.

Hey, did you vote for Harper? Oh yeah that's right, no you didn't. You didn't vote for any PM because Canadians can only vote for a political party, a political party that then decides who gets to lead the country.

Criticizing our democracy, while you have FAR LESS democracy shows how stupid you are.

[ForkRobotik]

At 6/11/07 11:44 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: Hey, did you vote for Harper? Oh yeah that's right, no you didn't. You didn't vote for any PM because Canadians can only vote for a political party, a political party that then decides who gets to lead the country.

Actually we also have independents, that usually run in different ridings. We don't vote for a party, we vote for individuals, some of whom may be in a party, such as the liberals/conservatives/communists/etc. Our ballots give a name and an affiliation(if there is one). If a party gets over half the seats, they rule til the next election, whereas if they get less, they can try and get together with other parties to form a government. Minority governments generally work out best, because if the leading party tries to do anything fucked up, the other parties can get together and force them out of office, in which case we have another election.

Criticizing our democracy, while you have FAR LESS democracy shows how stupid you are.

Are you an idiot, you have more democracy? You have a two party system you dolt. Also, please research things before type the shit that comes out of your cellardoor. It does you little justice.

[cellardoor6]

At 6/11/07 11:59 PM, ForkRobotik wrote:

At 6/11/07 11:44 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: Hey, did you vote for Harper? Oh yeah that's right, no you didn't. You didn't vote for any PM because Canadians can only vote for a political party, a political party that then decides who gets to lead the country.

Actually we also have independents, that usually run in different ridings.

We have independents as well.

We don't vote for a party, we vote for individuals,

Um no you don't! Not if you want to have any impact on who becomes your Prime Minister. You don't vote for him directly like we do our President. You vote for parliamentarians and the party that gets the most votes appoints the Prime Minister.

At the federal level, Americans vote for the President, Senators, and State Representatives. This is in addition to legislators (who make state laws) and governors (administrators of state) at the state level. We choose our head of government of both our state government and the federal government, you don't, you choose a party.

Criticizing our democracy, while you have FAR LESS democracy shows how stupid you are.

Are you an idiot, you have more democracy? You have a two party system you dolt.

Yes we have more democracy than you. We have a FAR less government intervention, and far more responsibility in state and local governments. Americans vote for FAR more things, more referendums, more political positions, etc.. Our states decide the majority of their own laws. YOUR country has a ridiculously powerful central government that forces itself on the rest of Canada, both provincially and locally. Canadians don't get decide the majority of their laws as provinces, Ottawa calls all the shots.

Also, please research things before type the shit that comes out of your cellardoor. It does you little justice.

Actually YOU need to do some more research. Were you even aware that technically, your official head of state is Queen Elizabeth?

[Memorize]

At 6/11/07 11:59 PM, ForkRobotik wrote:

Are you an idiot, you have more democracy? You have a two party system you dolt.

Eh... no.

You can vote for whoever the hell you want. The independant... the Green. That national socialist green party...

It's just that only 1 of 2 parties ever win.

[ForkRobotik]

At 6/12/07 12:08 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: Um no you don't! Not if you want to have any impact on who becomes your Prime Minister. You don't vote for him directly like we do our President. You vote for parliamentarians and the party that gets the most votes appoints the Prime Minister.

No one appoints the prime minister, whoever is the leader of the party that gets the most votes becomes prime minister. Also, The way someone becomes a leader is different for each party. Why are you trying to call me out on my own country? LOL

At the federal level, Americans vote for the President, Senators, and State Representatives. This is in addition to legislators (who make state laws) and governors (administrators of state) at the state level. We choose our head of government of both our state government and the federal government, you don't, you choose a party.

We actually do have a provincial/municipal government as well, just so you know :)

Yes we have more democracy than you. We have a FAR less government intervention, and far more responsibility in state and local governments. Americans vote for FAR more things, more referendums, more political positions, etc.. Our states decide the majority of their own laws. YOUR country has a ridiculously powerful central government that forces itself on the rest of Canada, both provincially and locally. Canadians don't get decide the majority of their laws as provinces, Ottawa calls all the shots.

Actually we have a special rule in canada, all provinces have to have equal laws...example: If it's legal for two gay people to get married in one province, it's automatically legal in ALL provinces. Thus our provincial courts have more power, while our Federal courts have (by default) less.
Another example would be if a provincial court Legalized "marijuana." Guess what, it's now legal everywhere in Canada, and the Feds can't jump in and block things like that, which your federal government does...which is quite undemocratic.
Our Federal government isn't quite as "all powerful" as you think. The provinces have alot of power when it comes to economic and social policies. The federal government doesn't make all the laws, just so you know, our provincial governments actually have more power then your state governments.

Actually YOU need to do some more research. Were you even aware that technically, your official head of state is Queen Elizabeth?

Ofcourse i am, but the only reason is to keep us in the commonwealth, which offeres trade and other benefits. What does that have to do with anything?!! We could leave whenever we wanted, just so you know ;) Don't try to educate me about my own country, you're embarrassing yourself.

[cellardoor6]

At 6/12/07 12:27 AM, ForkRobotik wrote:

At 6/12/07 12:08 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: Um no you don't! Not if you want to have any impact on who becomes your Prime Minister. You don't vote for him directly like we do our President. You vote for parliamentarians and the party that gets the most votes appoints the Prime Minister.

No one appoints the prime minister, whoever is the leader of the party that gets the most votes becomes prime minister.

Who appoints the leader of the party?

.... the party, not the voters. Use your brain, holy hell.

We actually do have a provincial/municipal government as well, just so you know :)

They aren't given a fraction of the responsibility over their districts that our states and local officials have.

For instance, my state right now could hold a referendum and change almost any of our laws aside from those that have Supreme Court rulings blocking it. We could abolish the death penalty, lower/raise sales tax, create our own state welfare system, permit/ban gay marriage etc..

We have a whole hell of a lot more democracy than your country does. It's not even a matter of opinion, it's a simple fact that our country has a weaker central government in relation to state and local governments, and that we have a much more divided share of power, rather than singular authority. Your country has much more power given to your central government.

Actually we have a special rule in canada, all provinces have to have equal laws...example: If it's legal for two gay people to get married in one province, it's automatically legal in ALL provinces.

Try... if your FEDERAL GOVERNMENT makes it legal to have gay marriage, ALL the provinces had to abide by it. It's not an "equal law" that is just a euphemism for "GOVERNMENT-FORCED LAW"

Another example would be if a provincial court Legalized "marijuana." Guess what, it's now legal everywhere in Canada, and the Feds can't jump in and block things like that.

Wait, so you're saying if Nova Scotia legalized weed, Ontario (who has much more people) and all the other provinces would be FORCED to legalize it even if they want to keep it legal? First of all, that's entirely false and you're pulling random nonsense out of your ass. You're ignoring the fact that it would be your FEDERAL GOVERNMENT who would make the law and would force all provinces to adopt it.

Secondly, if that was true, how the HELL would that be more democratic? That would mean the majority DOESN'T rule, because if all the provinces but one decided to keep it illegal, then they would be forced to do the will of a fraction of the entire country.

So yeah... you're full of shit.

which your federal government does...which is quite undemocratic.

Actually states in the US individually vote on drug laws. Nevada for example has some of the most lax drug laws, possessing weed in small amounts is no longer a crime. Meanwhile, a similar offense in New Jersey would be a years-long jail sentence.

Actually YOU need to do some more research. Were you even aware that technically, your official head of state is Queen Elizabeth?

Ofcourse i am, but the only reason is to keep us in the commonwealth, which offeres trade and other benefits. What does that have to do with anything?!!

How can you truly consider yourself a democratic, independent country when officially, your head of state is someone who sits on a thrown in an entire different continent? And don't give me the whole "she gives her powers to Ottawa" nonsense, I'm aware of it. But this is the 21st century, and you have a queen. It's ridiculous.

We could leave whenever we wanted, just so you know ;)

Then you'd have to change your entire constitution.

Don't try to educate me about my own country, you're embarrassing yourself.

Haha you're embarrassing yourself because apparently, you know less about your own country than I do.

The bit about one province being able to force all other provinces to create a law regardless of their own individual stance was quite hilarious, especially when you pretended it was more democratic than the US system.

In our system, states make most of their own laws. When they don't, they get an equal representation in the government bodies that do make the laws. Your country has a singular central government that can override anything, without consensus.

[JakeHero]

Not to start a flamewar, but didn't any of you notice how desperately democrats were trying to get the apathetic and misinformed to vote during the 2004 elections?

[Memorize]

At 6/12/07 03:43 AM, JakeHero wrote: Not to start a flamewar, but didn't any of you notice how desperately democrats were trying to get the apathetic and misinformed to vote during the 2004 elections?

You see, that's why they wanted to pass the immigration bill. What is that for them? Like, 10 million more democrat votes?

[TheMason]

At 6/12/07 12:12 AM, Memorize wrote: You can vote for whoever the hell you want. ... the Green. That national socialist green party...

Ahh just what we need, NAZIs who are environmentalists. I wonder what their flag would look like?

One thing I hate about our country is that you can be asleep and not watch any news or think that "that's just politics...that's not important" and then step into a voting booth and cast a vote that cancels mine out. And yes I do mean to sound arrogant and self-absorbed.

But the truth is that I eat, sleep and breathe politics. It is my field of study and my profession.

And yet while I may be highly versed in political theory, structure, International Relations and Military Science (all things I have studied extensively and/or have practical life experience in)...some HS drop-out who watches TV all day or some MD who spends all her time with her nose in medical journals or a petrie dish...has a vote that counts the same as mine when they are both ill-informed.

I know I am ranting right now, but realize that what I am saying is not about education levels. I am sure that there are people out there with no HS degree (much less any college) yet are literate and read anything and everything they can get their hands on concerning government and politics. Them voting does not get on my nerves...even when they cast a vote counter to mine. All I care about is that they cast AN INFORMED VOTE!

And that is what I hate about MTV's Rock the Vote campaign. Just because you can does not mean that you should. If you are voting because Madonna or P. Diddy is telling you it's cool or that you should...pick up a damn paper and watch some C-SPAN! If you are tuned out...don't vote. That is how Democracies/Republics turn into Totalitarian/Fascist Dictatorships a la Nazi Germany!

[Memorize]

At 6/12/07 06:23 PM, TheMason wrote:

Ahh just what we need, NAZIs who are environmentalists. I wonder what their flag would look like?

I think it's just the nazi flag with a green background.

[Dr-Worm]

At 6/12/07 03:43 AM, JakeHero wrote: Not to start a flamewar, but didn't any of you notice how desperately democrats were trying to get the apathetic and misinformed to vote during the 2004 elections?

That's just because John Kerry was an unelectable piece of shit.

But back on topic, I've always been a bit confused about something. Does the popular vote actually mean anything? If it's the Electoral College that picks the President, what the popular vote do?

[TheMason]

At 6/12/07 06:53 PM, Memorize wrote:

At 6/12/07 06:23 PM, TheMason wrote:

Ahh just what we need, NAZIs who are environmentalists. I wonder what their flag would look like?

I think it's just the nazi flag with a green background.

That's a little generic...they can do better than that! What about a little flower in the center of the bent Swastika?

And are they still evil? I mean does the purity of being and environmentalist cancel out the evil of being a Nazi?

[MortifiedPenguins]

At 6/12/07 04:04 AM, Memorize wrote:

At 6/12/07 03:43 AM, JakeHero wrote:

You see, that's why they wanted to pass the immigration bill. What is that for them? Like, 10 million more democrat votes?

Yeah, in like 5 years.

[Me-Patch]

At 6/12/07 07:04 PM, TheMason wrote: And are they still evil? I mean does the purity of being and environmentalist cancel out the evil of being a Nazi?

They think that we can fix the environment by gassing all the blacks and jews, Theyr'e just silly Nazi's.

[TheThing]

At 6/10/07 05:15 PM, Me-Patch wrote:

At 6/10/07 05:12 PM, fahrenheit wrote:

At 6/10/07 05:07 PM, Me-Patch wrote: Ever hear of of the electoral college.

whats does that have to do with anything?

He says he doesn't think the American people are intellegent enough to have full democratic authority, that would be the reason why the electoral college was set in place by our founding fathers.

No, the founding fathers knew that information didn't spread quickly (at the time), so they put in that system. All the votes from them are usually how the state is decided, although the person could change their vote, if they really wanted to.

[Me-Patch]

At 6/12/07 08:47 PM, TheThing wrote: No, the founding fathers knew that information didn't spread quickly (at the time), so they put in that system. All the votes from them are usually how the state is decided, although the person could change their vote, if they really wanted to.

The electoral college is in place to prevent a popular vote system that could elect a person who wins by a large margin in a few states over another person who wins by small margins in most states. It was implemented to help appease the different state goverments during a time when States rights were a heated topic, and different states populations had radicaly different views.

[Cole]

At 6/12/07 06:53 PM, Memorize wrote:

At 6/12/07 06:23 PM, TheMason wrote:

Ahh just what we need, NAZIs who are environmentalists. I wonder what their flag would look like?

I think it's just the nazi flag with a green background.

Weirdest. Party. Evar.

:also:

[TheMason]

At 6/12/07 07:04 PM, Dr-Worm wrote: But back on topic, I've always been a bit confused about something. Does the popular vote actually mean anything? If it's the Electoral College that picks the President, what the popular vote do?

The electoral college determines which party's slate of electors will go to Washington DC and pick the President. Now many states have laws that require the electors to vote for the person (party) who carried that state. In other states the electors are divided out proportionately with how many votes each candidate received.

[JakeHero]

At 6/12/07 09:16 PM, Cole wrote: Weirdest. Party. Evar.

also:

Rammstein should have that on the front of their next cover album.