Why is the United States so opposed to a real democracy where 1 person counts as 1 vote...

A true democracy would give all the power over to a few of the most densely populated areas in the US

Also there is no freedom in a democracy, the minorty simply gets crushed

1. Define this "intelligence" that you speak of.
2. Are you saying that this class of 'intelligent' people deserve a higher say then what the people have a right too? That sounds like a form of oligarchy where a small collective group of people get to govern our society which sounds very unappealing to me.
3. Are you saying that you support the notion of not having a true democracy and would rather a small collective of people that make all our decisions in government? Who's to say those small intelligent people won't conspire against what the majority wants for their own private benefit at the detriment of the collective majority? That sounds tyrannical.

ITT: people who don't understand the distinction between the electoral college and direct democracy.

I'm the person you replied to and
This

> A true democracy would give all the power over to a few of the most densely populated areas of the US
Your point being??? What about 1 person= 1 vote don't you understand? So you think fewer people should have more power then the collective majority? What a shitty argument.

how convenient, so your answer is just rubbish and should be ignored

Whoa son. Triggered? Go find a safe space and some crayons. When you stop hyperventilating, come back and understand what Conservative and Libtard mean. During elections, enough right thinking citizens vote to keep our country on track as a Super Power. Then your side tries to sign up every border jumper, convicted felon, apache helicopter and post op tranny to elect liars like Hillary. Get over it. Your side lost. But keep making noise. It alerts productive citizens to stock up on ammo and vote in every election.

and? why does living in a city mean you get less of a say?

Well your argumentative skills seem very lackluster at convincing me of your point on why why should not have a true democracy.

Oh grow up

You are just proving that you literally don't understand the concept of democracy.

You want all of the decisions in this country to go your way. We get it. That's not democracy.

You sound very sensitive to constructive criticism. Come back to me when you have a real cogent argument or get the fuck out my way.

>Then your side

Bitch, you don't even know what fucking "side" I am on so stop projecting your ideas on what you think about me and instead TALK to me and ask questions about my views.
Also, the first responder is me as well.

popular vote is basically mob rule.

not good for low population states or ppl who disagree with the majority (i.e. republicans/libertarians in california)

Why should less people get more say in what goes in our counry? So mob rule is ONLY okay when the mob is a minority? Your argument sounds flimsy at best.

*on in our country

Your CoNsTrUcTiVe CrItIsM is the temper tantrum of a 4 year old that wants what it wants when it wants it and has no concept of the consequences of it's choices. Put down the soy milk, back away from the Communist Manifesto, and understand the Dem's Big Tent is eating it's self. Go have an abortion, eat more mushrooms, and drift off to your lala land while your parents continue paying for your Liberal education. When you graduate from University, I'll tell you what I want on my burger.

>you want all of the decisions in this country to go your way

1. I never said "my" way, I said the majority of the populace's way which is a democracy
2. I could flip and reverse your argument against you which means your logic is extremely interchangeable.
Come up with something better to try too convince me of your point. Also, what is "my way"??

Your entire response is riddled with nothing but shitty ad-hominems that add absolutely nothing of discussion to the argument at hand. Either shape the fuck up or get the fuck out of my way you philistine.

Because that's called democracy you absolute fucking moron.

Listen to me, and fucking think about what you are saying very carefully.

holy shit

You sound like fucking Kim Jong Un. Are you a totalitarian dictator?

The fucking basis of democracy is coming to terms with the fact that nobody is 100% right. Everybody wants certain things but if you give one group everything then everything is thrown out of balance and you disenfranchise another group. This is so basic to fucking normal everyday life in this country how could you not understand this basic concept.

Because it's the UNITED STATES. If some of those states had no voice in elections because their population was lower than others then there'd be no benefit of the union to them.

So you are advocating for the rule of this country through a small minoral group of people who inherently do not have the interests of the majority of this country at heart? Are you even listening to yourself? Also that "one group" you are speaking of as if it's some evil horrible boogeyman is the ENTIRE POPULACE of the United States. What part of 1 person = 1 vote do you not fucking understand? You need to take basic arithmetic classes bro.

Gr8 b8 m8 8/8

So you think votes should be based off of inanimate drawings on a sheet of paper for landmass instead of actual living, breathing human beings?? That's a very shitty argument. If an idea is good, then let is win in the open market of ideas instead of allowing minority groups to run the country. It's as simple as that. Representation should not be based off of arbitrary lines drawn onto maps. It should be based off the people that live inside of our country.

It's impossible to tell whether this is a troll thread or just one dude with Trump Derangement Syndrome. They've all lost their minds to such a degree that I'd believe either.

because true democracies cannot exist. the United States is a republic because this is what allows the country to prosper. every country that has become a democracy has failed and fallen.

No U! So explain how reenacting the French Revolution will improve the US. Who do you think will win a civil war when the farms are owned by gun toting white folks? The cities will burn and what you perceive as a Majority will rot in the streets.

What does Donald Trump have to do with the argument at hand? That is completely and entirely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. We are discussing the voting process, not who is anointed President of the United States. I would like to request that you stay on topic.

Democracy time, Yea Forums, the majority is always right and there's more repliers than there are OPs in this thread so we get to decide his fate. 1 person = 1 vote.

strawpoll.me/18143857

>because true democracy cannot exist
says who?
>what allows the country to prosper
Prosper in what way? Define this prospering you speak of

>Your VaLiD ArGuMeNt is the reasonable, thought out beliefs of a reasonable, forward thinking, empathetic individual that wants the best quality of life and most representation for the most people but it and has no concept of over representing the rich and rural. Put down the (perceived Boomer insult), back away from the (belief system I'm afraid of and ignorant about), and understand the (things fox news has told me are true). Go (Ad Hominem zero content nonsense) . When you (finish working much harder than o ever had too, I'll watch you struggle in the economy I ruined.

FTFY

Yeet, but the people get to vote on the oligarchy they want. But I still think that majority rule should be a thing

>but the people
that sounds like a logical fallacy. You JUST stated you do NOT want the vote of the majority. So a minority group of people get to vote on a minority group of people to run the country, telling the majority what they should and should not do. That's fucking preposterous.

Who let the retard in?

Listen up you postmodernist cretin, they aren't lines on a map, the states were independent countries which got together to form a supergovernment made up of members of all of them to oversee larger issues and disputes between them. Ignoring the votes of some of them would be like the EU deciding that France no longer gets a vote because there are more non-French than French.

We have a decentralized system to limit the abuses of corrupt high population centers like NYC Chicago and LA where they massive amounts of people voting in addition to the dead and pets. Its to prevent these larger areas from deciding policy that affects them positively and at everyone elses expenses. For example using the opposite political side imagine of Texas or Arizona passed laws on water usage based on their own demographics on a place like Chicago where they have a freshwater later bigger than most

>references that this dumb shit was thought up 200 years ago
>still thinks he's right

This is why I vote. To stop retards like you.

Sounds like most of these ”muh freedom” folks don’t want that at all, they want an oligarchy where the political landscape fucks them in the bum, claiming they are helping them find cancer, when they’re just jizzing uncontrollably, beating up those dumb fucker’s guts.

What is forgetting about state government deciding local issues for 100 Alex

>that's why I vote.
That's dumb. You just admitted you like the system that's currently in place that VASTLY diminishes your power of the vote. The people who currently are in power have a vested interest in maintaining their power and the way they can do that is by preventing a democracy. You JUST admitted your vote is basically pointless and that you support the very minoral few that have the power in this country. What a self-defeating post/argument you just made.

>to stop retards like you
so sayith the retard.

because true democracies never work
anybody with the right propoganda can just win easily and abuse the fuck out of this country and immediately change it into a dictatorship
elections need guidance and correction

You think that doesn’t already go on? This man is delusional, send him to the infirmary.

The United States is a Republic, not a Democracy, If the electoral college was not in place then only California, and Newyork, voters would matter so all their ideas and need/wants would be heard and voted on fucking over all the smaller states with lower populations and vastly different needs and wants who would never be heard and be negatively affected. Then Florida and Texas would be the next big two who would have a huge say in what laws are passed and people that get into office are etc. So you would have only 4 states out of 50 the US has that politicians would care about, they would only go to those states for rallies, and talks and get in touch with their voter base. Who they elect would always win and to keep those 4 states voting for them they would care about only those four states issues. The US was set up for the states to have more voice regardless of population size/land mass so each states issues would be heard, and not put on the side burner cause who cares about you with 3mill population when there is 45million in this state. Plus this would more or less fuck over the point of state laws as a state with a massive swing in the national government would just impose all their state laws into national laws. The electoral college is there to keep the powers of the state in check so one state doesn't control the majority of the national government. The whole system of the US government is a delicate check and balance system from the national level to the state level so no one body has more than 50% control. If remove the Electorial college and go to a true democracy the whole system would fall apart to revolution and civil war within a decade as not once in the history of the world has a true 100% democracy lasted more then a few decades.

Honestly, I'm not sure why we even show the public what the popular vote is. It's completely irrelevant, so why bother showing it? Might as well show the atmospheric pressure over the white house while we're showing people information that doesn't matter.

The electoral college was designed the way it is for a number of reasons, but an important one that is often overlooked is that the founding fathers understood that the average American was uneducated, and would be likely to vote in a way that wasn't actually in their best interest. So the electoral college would be a group of educated people to be separate from the popular vote, the popular vote only being taken as to inform the electorates of how the people wanted them to vote. There was nothing actually making them vote that way. They could vote however they wanted.

While we, as a nation, are certainly better educated now than we were in 1776, I would argue that most Americans still do not vote in their own best interest.

Then the states got involved with the process, and this (in my opinion) is where it got fucked up. The states put restrictions on their own electorates. They would make anyone who is part of the electoral college sign a contract. If the electorate broke from the contract they would incur severe financial penalties, as well as they would not be allowed be an electorate again in the future. (each state is different - so they all have different contracts). But this, in many cases, severely restricts the electorate to do what they think is best, and only in fringe cases does anyone break their contract.

The electoral college was designed to keep clowns out of the office, but the limitations placed on it by the states has created a broken system where the popular vote matters - where the uneducated get to make decisions.

Also a very great point Good work user.

>i live in a shitty tiny village in buttfuck mo therefore i am entitled to more votes than someone living in a city

Attached: dedede.jpg (299x299, 23K)

Probably because it would just be a mob thing.. the largest group of lemmings would come out on top every time.

Because democracy is retarded.

Think of how dumb the average person is. Now think of how half of the people are dumber than that.

So knowing how fucking simple minded people are, we are going to let them pick our leaders in a popularity contest?

That’s how fucking nuts democracy is.

>Honestly, I'm not sure why we even show the public what the popular vote is. It's completely irrelevant, so why bother showing it? Might as well show the atmospheric pressure over the white house while we're showing people information that doesn't matter.

I agree with you on that. Literally none of that fucking matters.

>is that the founding fathers understood that the average American was uneducated, and would be likely to vote in a way that wasn't actually in their best interest.

The founding fathers also designed the nation to be able to adapt, change, and update pur laws to conform with the ever-changing times. That’s why our laws were so shitty, we had to amend the constitution 17 times. I also don’t understand our need to constantly capitulate to what they “intended” time and time again like they’re these godly dieties that should never be questioned. They are products of their own time and that has long since come and gone and they’re fucking dead. Let’s move on.

>the popular vote only being taken as to inform the electorates of how the people wanted them to vote

You just admitted in your openning statement that this doesn’t even fucking matter in the slightest. They have almost never voted in theinterests of tje mahority and time and time again (edoecially in modern times the past 50 years) voted in the interests of their donors and wealthy business owners. They only vote for the expansion of their own power when necesarry and to enrich themselves. These “intelligent” individuals are using their intellect to exploit the majority of americans at their detriment.

Ypur closing argument illucidates the contractual oblgations that these representatives are required to sign when joining either the DNC or the RNC but then it quickly discusses their limitations where you close it by pivoting to this notion that it allows “the uneducated” to get into power without going into much detail.

Part 2 of my previous post
You state that allowing a true democracy would enable unintelligent voters to be put into power then at the very bottom of your post admit that due to some contractual agreement that they get into power anyways. It sounds like your entire argument is almost self-defeating.

Oops I meant part 2 of this post. For some reason I accidentally clicked the other one.

You're describing mob rule... that's the problem

This is more important than the 2016 election. Also, op, you should livestream it when the “yes” votes win.

"mob rule" this is just the buzzword assigned to this topic to be spouted out by brainlets when defending the status quo

Or better yet, why not propose this to congress and let an actual democratic vote take place?

Or better yet, why not propose this to congress and let an actual democratic vote take place?

Dubs & trips of truth!

>define this prospering you speak of
This is gold

Mkay cupcake

Why? Because of how ambiguous the original poster was when talking about how we are ‘prospering’ or because you think the ambiguity is necesarry and it should already be understood in whatever way our nation is prospering?

Just your autism in general. The argument itself is boring.

This makes sense for governing national issues and laws but it make no sense when electing an individual to lead. As it would be total across the country, just individuals voting for an individual.