Any chance to turn the US into a democracy?

[Susheel]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Yes.

Did you actually think things had changed, or were you just hoping I couldn't find anything recent?

Any response to my post?

[Sideroxylon]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

No political system can survive ~40% of the population being THIS intentionally wrong for affect.

The United States has not suffered a political or governmental or societal collapse (or at least not directly, it's suffered all of those things but those are symptoms) it has suffered an intellectual one.

And I'd caution against other countries, from the glorious perfect socialist utopias of Europe to the iron fisted totalitarian regimes and everyone in between putting on too high of airs about. Your political systems will not survive an intellectual collapse any better than ours is doing.

I don't care how good your political system is design. If ~40% of your population wakes up one morning and decides being intentionally wrong and daring the system to stop them is the easiest route to getting what they want, you will have problems.

Sounds a bit defensive and part of the problem. Capitalism and corporations wont make things better.

Should have listened to Sagan and his socialist ideas about ensuring every child in public schools got nutritious meals and a quality education. Do nothing Democrats like Biden wont fix things. Capitalism and small government wont. Maybe the economy has to go down the ******* for the wider population to take to the streets and demands change, waking up to the distraction of culture war politics. Don’t use labels like socialism because nobody knows what they mean outside of vague pejorative. Focus on policy.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by uke2se

I understand what you're saying, and I also understand that quite a bit of it is in affect, but people didn't just wake up and decide to be wrong. They were instructed, over many years, just how to be wrong.

Obviously "wake up and be wrong" was a bit of colorful language, on par with "Woke up and chose violence." And more than anyone I've tried to impress upon people how NOT NEW any of this is if you've been watching the fringes. Every single tactic being used by the Proudly Wrong has been field tested for decades by the Woo Slingers and Pseudoscientist and Conspiracy Theorists. I am not over and have no intentions of getting over how we've let the internet just be the petri dish for "Ways to not argue when you're wrong."

But I do think the Right adopting the troll/contrarian/sealioning trifecta of argumentative shutdown happened faster than anyone thought.

Nobody here would have taken me seriously if I said in... 2018 that we would have a real life internet troll as an elected member of Congress, literally chasing other members of Congress down the halls screaming "Debate me you coward!"

Quote:

That said, what can you do about it? The stage of grief you need to hurry up and get to is acceptance. That's when you get productive.

Well I have opinions on that matter but they tend to get me yellow carded.

Safest, within the MA way I can put it is that we need to demonize any place that serves as a safe place for being wrong.

The wrong will be wrong. The problem is too many correct people still running interference for them.

Oh and you need to get the "acceptance" part of the stages of grief the fastest because that's accepting that you can't change anything. That's not what we are doing here. I hope.

[JoeMorgue]

As far as actual, factual, objective, real world "This will make effective change that will (someone) be able to remain above all the issues mentioned" that is possible, not probably, not even likely but not "crazy fringe idea that might as well be a thought experiment" level of possible...

The Interstate Popular Vote Compact. The most likely way of (functionally) getting rid of the Electoral Collage.

[uke2se]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

As far as actual, factual, objective, real world "This will make effective change that will (someone) be able to remain above all the issues mentioned" that is possible, not probably, not even likely but not "crazy fringe idea that might as well be a thought experiment" level of possible...

The Interstate Popular Vote Compact. The most likely way of (functionally) getting rid of the Electoral Collage.

Doesn't that rely on a majority of states signing on? Also, it only pertains to the Presidential election, correct?

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by uke2se

Doesn't that rely on a majority of states signing on? Also, it only pertains to the Presidential election, correct?

Sorta but since we're comparing the weighted size of the states in the EC to their actual size it's not THAT insane. I mean technically there's already enough states that have either passed it or have pending legislation for it to go into effect.

Again not perfect, as you say it doesn't address Senatorial imbalance and the screeching and legal fights from the Right if it ever happens would be... a thing.

But it would be an actual level of improvement that couldn't be shrugged off as symbolic or destined to fail which would be... something at least.

[JoeMorgue]

More so then the actual battles won the worst thing about the EC and and the Senatorial Imbalance is it gives the illusion of the Right and Left in America being rougly equal sides.

The Truth. There's a LOT more Democrats than Republicans in the United States and its not like even close.

[BobTheCoward]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

More so then the actual battles won the worst thing about the EC and and the Senatorial Imbalance is it gives the illusion of the Right and Left in America being rougly equal sides.

The Truth. There's a LOT more Democrats than Republicans in the United States and its not like even close.

Only if you think states are glorified administrative divisions.

But not really. I think states are semi sovereign and I hate the electoral college

[uke2se]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Sorta but since we're comparing the weighted size of the states in the EC to their actual size it's not THAT insane. I mean technically there's already enough states that have either passed it or have pending legislation for it to go into effect.

Again not perfect, as you say it doesn't address Senatorial imbalance and the screeching and legal fights from the Right if it ever happens would be... a thing.

But it would be an actual level of improvement that couldn't be shrugged off as symbolic or destined to fail which would be... something at least.

What is stopping it from going into effect?

[JoeMorgue]

The other big thing that would actually "fix" something is mandatory ranked choice voting, but I see that as a harder fight. (Could be wrong on that one, would be thrilled if I was because that could effect a greater range of elections.)

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

As far as actual, factual, objective, real world "This will make effective change that will (someone) be able to remain above all the issues mentioned" that is possible, not probably, not even likely but not "crazy fringe idea that might as well be a thought experiment" level of possible...

The Interstate Popular Vote Compact. The most likely way of (functionally) getting rid of the Electoral Collage.

Yeah, that's not really the fundamental problem. Nor am I convinced that it would make all that much difference. Hell, I'm not convinced it would even change the outcome of a single election. Yes, Trump didn't win the popular vote. But he also didn't campaign on the basis of trying to win the popular vote. Neither did Hillary. Republican candidates don't really campaign for votes in Democratic strongholds like California and New York. But if the election depended on the popular vote, they likely would, and that could change vote totals. So we don't know what would have happened had the rules been different.

But let's suppose it might swing a few presidential elections every once in a while. Then what? As Biden should have made you aware by now, getting the president you want doesn't just magically fix anything.

[BobTheCoward]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

The other big thing that would actually "fix" something is mandatory ranked choice voting, but I see that as a harder fight.

Because it is incredibly unfair to give someone a second vote. I will support ranked choice voting if the people in first and second got a second vote added to their preferred candidate in the next round.

[The Great Zaganza]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Yes.

Did you actually think things had changed, or were you just hoping I couldn't find anything recent?

A bit of collum A, a bit of collum B.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by uke2se

What is stopping it from going into effect?

Right now that some of the legislation is still pending, as far as I know. (It's a rather complicated legal agreement and this is all from a layman's perspective.)

As best as I understand it.

It is in legal effect in states representing a total of 195 electoral votes.
It is pending legislation in states representing an additional 93 electoral votes.
If it gets to 270, it goes into effect.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

The Truth. There's a LOT more Democrats than Republicans in the United States and its not like even close.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/p...filiation.aspx

2022 Mar 1-18
Republican 28% Independent 40% Democrat 30%

28% to 30% looks close to me.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

A bit of collum A, a bit of collum B.

Sorry to disappoint. But these are long-standing trends, they are unlikely to change any time soon. It would be very significant news if they did.

[BobTheCoward]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/p...filiation.aspx

2022 Mar 1-18
Republican 28% Independent 40% Democrat 30%

28% to 30% looks close to me.

I would generally consider people that vote democrat is a better indicator than what someone says, and more people vote democrat

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/p...filiation.aspx

2022 Mar 1-18
Republican 28% Independent 40% Democrat 30%

28% to 30% looks close to me.

Don't cherry pick data it's beneath... actually it's pretty much on level with you.

There are more members of the Democratic Party than the Republican party by a huge margin and Democratic Policies are, outside of a couple of exception, universally more popular with the public.

The Republicans haven't actually won the popular vote of a Presidential election in some people on this board's lifetimes.

MOST people don't want to be sad little hateful trolls angry and scared of anyone who isn't a waspy straight old money white male.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

I believe there's a fundamental flaw in the nature of democracy: it brings power to the people, a large portion of whom are motivated more by self-interest than the ideals of democracy, so that portion will use the power they gain through democracy to democratically hinder democracy. Democracy resets itself to un-democracy, in other words. And it will continue to do so in cycles forever until/unless human nature significantly changes so that self-interest isn't a stronger motivator than democratic ideals.

I think it's a version/variation of the "Comfort Paradox."

Long story short Democracy solves itself out of the problems it is created to counter, leading to people seeing it as no longer necessary.

[theprestige]

The United States are already fifty democracies, with a federal republic governing the union itself. Think of it as a more refined version of the EU.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by theprestige

The United States are already fifty democracies, with a federal republic governing the union itself. Think of it as a more refined version of the EU.

If between 1/3-1/2 of the Countries in the EU voted in Nazis, sure.

[The Great Zaganza]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Sorry to disappoint. But these are long-standing trends, they are unlikely to change any time soon. It would be very significant news if they did.

Acknowledged.

It's just that I find it weird for a company to settle in a State that can't keep the lights and heating on (Texas).

[Susheel]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

Acknowledged.

It's just that I find it weird for a company to settle in a State that can't keep the lights and heating on (Texas).

I think weaker labour laws, Environment protection and waste management requirements, heavy sops and subsidies Trump that.

[Susheel]

Texas also provides quicker access to cheap migrant labour.

[The Great Zaganza]

I don't think the trends favor Red States, but that is probably a discussion for another thread.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

I don't think the trends favor Red States, but that is probably a discussion for another thread.

Oh on a long enough time frame they will lose. Everything base reality to base human decency to the way the winds of history are blowing are against them.

That's largely why they shifted from actually fighting for anything to just burning everything down and laughing at the ashes.

It don't think that is off topic. The nihilism streak in the Right is a major factor.

[Segnosaur]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

I do have (blind) hope, because, ironically, voters both on the Left and the Right don't feel represented by their elected leaders;

Yes, but there is a fundamental difference.

The left doesn't feel like they are represented because an undue amount of political influence lies with states that have more cows than people, and those states elect politicians more interested in enacting unpopular changes (taking away women's rights, eliminating health care, giving tax breaks to millionaires, etc.) than in actually improving the lives of the voters they represent.

The right doesn't feel they are represented because they think lizard people (under the control of George Soros) conspired with china to hire illegal aliens from Mexico to hack voting machines using bamboo ballots. And of course, when they do get their preferred republican elected, many will still complain because the republican does what the republican promised they would do, instead of what the voter actually wanted. (For example, look at all the republican voters who actually liked the Affordable care act, yet vote for republicans who openly say "I will eliminate the ACA".)

In other words, once side has a valid reason to feel disenfranchised, the other (composed largely of morons) does not. I will leave it as an intellectual exercise for readers to figure out which is which.

And unfortunately the "solution" to both of those problems is radically different, and even contradictory in some cases.

[Segnosaur]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

No political system can survive ~40% of the population being THIS intentionally wrong for affect.

The United States has not suffered a political or governmental or societal collapse (or at least not directly, it's suffered all of those things but those are symptoms) it has suffered an intellectual one.

And I'd caution against other countries, from the glorious perfect socialist utopias of Europe to the iron fisted totalitarian regimes and everyone in between putting on too high of airs about. Your political systems will not survive an intellectual collapse any better than ours is doing.

I don't care how good your political system is design. If ~40% of your population wakes up one morning and decides being intentionally wrong and daring the system to stop them is the easiest route to getting what they want, you will have problems.

Actually in some countries it would be worse.

Canada uses the Westminster parliamentary system (based on the U.K. system). Thanks to vote splitting and first-past=the-post, parties regularly gain majority control with less than 40% of the vote. And the Prime Minister holds a lot more control over his members of parliament than the U.S. president has over congress. If Stubby McBonespurs had come to power under the Canadian system, it probably would have been a lot worse than it was in the U.S. over Trump's term. (Picture Trump with the power to not only issue executive orders, but to actually get legislation passed.)

Yet Canada hasn't fallen into the dystopia that the U.S. has fallen into. None of our parties have adopted the populist "hurt the other guys for no other reason than to see them cry" that the republicans have. Even when we had a conservative prime minister, they made no attempts to ban abortion, eliminate gay marriage, etc.

[JoeMorgue]

Yeah but here in the United Assault Rifles of Eagleland that feeds into the Republican narrative.

Another way they've broken the system is that well poisoning idea they promote that government is bad, therefore elect them so they can break it before the Democrats get too much power and turn us all into lesbian communist or whatever.

When they govern "badly" it works in their favor via several layers of insane troll logic.

[varwoche]

Originally Posted by uke2se

I am pretty sure I already know the answer to the question in the title, but I'd like to see it discussed. What would it take for a return of democracy to the US? By democracy, I mean majority rule by consent of the goverened with actual ways to remedy grievances through elections.

As I understand the US system, it seems utterly broken, unless you view it as an oppressive system more akin to a theocracy or a so-called "managed democracy" like Russia or Hungary. I don't think that the US is quite there yet, but it's heading in that direction and I don't see an off-ramp.

I know the usual answer is to "vote", but given the fact that some votes count a lot more than others and a lot of people aren't given a chance to vote, that seems like a less than helpful suggestion. So, how do you guys plan to stop this decline into authoritarianism? Anyone got any useful ideas?

The decline of US democracy may not be reversable. The constitution, in combination with the EC, senate rules, House make-up, gerrymandering, legalized voter suppression, and the current SCOTUS, form a suicide pact. Add to this a two party system where one of the parties flat out opposes democracy.

I propose an organized effort for opponents of authoritarianism to move en mass to the Dakotas and swing the 4 senate seats. But alas, it's a fantasy.

[Segnosaur]

Originally Posted by uke2se

Quote:

The Interstate Popular Vote Compact. The most likely way of (functionally) getting rid of the Electoral Collage.

Doesn't that rely on a majority of states signing on? Also, it only pertains to the Presidential election, correct?

Technically not a majority of states, but it has to be enough states that comprise the majority of voters. (So if, for example, the top 10 states by population signed on, the compact would go into effect, even if the smallest 40 states didn't.)

Of course, the problem is that there is a very good chance that some state will decide to break the compact the moment the nationwide popular vote goes against the state's results.

[jrhowell]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

The other big thing that would actually "fix" something is mandatory ranked choice voting, but I see that as a harder fight. (Could be wrong on that one, would be thrilled if I was because that could effect a greater range of elections.)

Republicans are one step ahead on that one. Governor DeSantis signed a bill into law last month that bans ranked choice voting here in Florida.

[Segnosaur]

Originally Posted by jrhowell

Republicans are one step ahead on that one. Governor DeSantis signed a bill into law last month that bans ranked choice voting here in Florida.

A bit off topic, but jeez... what happened to Florida?

While the republicans won Florida in the last couple of elections, the results were close, and Obama did win the state twice. So its not some deep red hell-hole, at least at the federal level.

Yet state-wise, the republicans have held on to the office of the gov. for decades. (And the republicans they pic are not some moderates, but often the worst of the worst right-wing lunatics, like Deathsantis and Discount Voldemort before him.)

[ahhell]

Meh, the problem in the US is actually too much democracy rather than not enough.

Get rid of primaries and go to ranked choice voting in the generals.

The way the US chooses party candidates is actually more democratic than almost any other country. Almost no other country as anything nearly as direct as the way we elect our chief executive either.

PMs are elected by MPs. MP Candidates are typically chose by parties, I'd guess how the parties select their candidates varies quite a bit.

Anyrate, it is true the Dems and Reps have hijacked the system and about the only thing we all agree on is that the only thing worse than our own party is the other party.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Don't cherry pick data it's beneath... actually it's pretty much on level with you.

In contrast to you, who hasn't presented any data at all.

Quote:

There are more members of the Democratic Party than the Republican party by a huge margin

By what measure? Who knows, you didn't present data. Perhaps you mean by party affiliation in voter registration. That's true. But I'm registered as a Democrat. Party registration doesn't mean much.

Quote:

and Democratic Policies are, outside of a couple of exception, universally more popular with the public.

That is very sensitive to how poll questions are phrased. And the exceptions matter a lot. Plus, as I already pointed out, Democratic states don't actually live up to their own professed beliefs. For example, democrats say they are in favor of affordable housing. It polls well. But they don't act like it when they're in power. Blue states are the worst when it comes to affordable housing.

Quote:

The Republicans haven't actually won the popular vote of a Presidential election in some people on this board's lifetimes.

In the sense that there are some minors on this board who only lived through one Republican presidential election victory, sure, but that's not exactly impressive. Oh, and what was it you said earlier about cherry picking?

Quote:

MOST people don't want to be sad little hateful trolls angry and scared of anyone who isn't a waspy straight old money white male.

For some reason, between the two of us, it's always you getting angry and being scared.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

I would generally consider people that vote democrat is a better indicator than what someone says, and more people vote democrat

But not by a large margin, which was the claim.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Segnosaur

A bit off topic, but jeez... what happened to Florida?

It's... complicated. Bear with me.

Okay as we've discussed at length on this board the whole Red State/Blue State thing is absolute nonsense. America is rural red and urban blue. A big city in Texas is (nearly) exactly as blue as a big city in California and a rural area in California is (nearly) exactly as red as a rural area in Texas.

Two things in Florida break that. Florida has huge swaths of ultra-conservative wealthy retirement communities which means Florida functionally has blue cities (or at least things that function as them if you simply must be pedantic) and a lot, not all but a lot, of Florida's Left is made of immigrants from Central America and they are goddamn terrified of anything that sounds too much like Far Left politics so every time a Democrat accidently, on purpose, or accidently on purpose says something that sounds like they are sucking Castro's communist schlong, the Democrats lose a lot of support in the uber-important Miami-Dade metro area.

So basically Florida has dense urban clusters of red (mega-sized retirement communities that function like small cities) that nobody else has and a sizeable demographic of a very different type of Left Leaning voter.

Add that to Florida just being a traditional swing state anyway and... there you go.

[BobTheCoward]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

It's... complicated. Bear with me.

Okay as we've discussed at length on this board the whole Red State/Blue State thing is absolute nonsense. America is rural red and urban blue. A big city in Texas is (nearly) exactly as blue as a big city in California and a rural area in California is (nearly) exactly as red as a rural area in Texas.

I think you might mean some set of cities like ultra-urban or something? Because most people in red states are living in cities....but not very large cities?

[Segnosaur]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Yeah, that's not really the fundamental problem. Nor am I convinced that it would make all that much difference. Hell, I'm not convinced it would even change the outcome of a single election. Yes, Trump didn't win the popular vote. But he also didn't campaign on the basis of trying to win the popular vote. Neither did Hillary. Republican candidates don't really campaign for votes in Democratic strongholds like California and New York. But if the election depended on the popular vote, they likely would, and that could change vote totals.

It sounds like you are assuming that Trump just showing up to campaign in California/New York would have an impact. More likely is the fact that republicans would actually have to change their policies to appeal to the California voter. Less "We are going to stop the evil brown people from stealing your babies" and more "We're going to actually think about fixing roads/health care/etc.".

Quote:

But let's suppose it might swing a few presidential elections every once in a while. Then what? As Biden should have made you aware by now, getting the president you want doesn't just magically fix anything.

It doesn't "Fix everything". But it can fix some things, and keep other things from getting worse.

Even if you had a case where Clinton won, but had to deal with an obstructionist Congress, at least you would not have had foolish attempts at environmental deregulation via executive order. You wouldn't have dozens of republican judges (some of whom were rated as unfit by the Bar). The U.S. wouldn't have gotten into various trade wars (that ended up increasing the trade deficit). And you wouldn't have had a huge deficit increase as the republicans gave tax breaks to millionaires.

Not a perfect situation, but better than the one we ended up with.

[JoeMorgue]

Protip. Don't listen to suggestions on how to fix things from the side who doesn't actually want to fix things.