|
On October 08 2020 22:23 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2020 22:05 JimmiC wrote:Next debate has been moved to be virtual because of Trump and his Covid. And of course Trump says he won't participate. LOL the hubris and lack of awareness is well. I'm sure his base won't care. But all the independents who are mad about him not taking responsibility for... well anything, I'm sure this is going to be another drop in the polls. Biden should show up and just spend the hour talking with saying how nice it is to not be interrupted. https://www.npr.org/2020/10/08/921538492/second-presidential-debate-to-be-virtual-commission-says Is he going to be in a position to have a debate in a week if he is still ill? What is worse for him, dodging the debate with a bad excuse or stand infront of the camera's for all the country to see while struggling to breath and wheezing? Good point, but he is toast either way in that scenario since he needs the debates way more than biden every day his support dwindles!
|
On October 08 2020 22:10 Nouar wrote: Your run of the mill republican senator asserting that democracy isn't the objective. No problem there.
Be happy with *our* rule, we don't care if the majority thinks otherwise. Nice views.
Bestest democracy in the world btw.
|
Republicans don't see democracy as an objective, nor do they want massive voting turnout. Remember, the lower the turnout, the better it has always been for republicans. An illiterate southerner's vote has more weight than the rest, cuz if it wasn't this way, republicans wouldn't be represented. Just like in most western democracies.
|
Democracy isn't the objective has been Mitch McConnells slogan for years tbh
|
I would actually possibly agree that democracy itself isn't the final objective. But you cannot achieve or guarantee that you maintain any of the real final objectives (like those that guy stated, liberty, peace and prosperity) without democracy. So democracy is still an important objective.
|
On October 08 2020 22:52 Simberto wrote: I would actually possibly agree that democracy itself isn't the final objective. But you cannot achieve or guarantee that you maintain any of the real final objectives (like those that guy stated, liberty, peace and prosperity) without democracy. So democracy is still an important objective. yeah, Democracy just happens to be the best way to achieve liberty, peace and prosperity.
|
On October 08 2020 22:55 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2020 22:52 Simberto wrote: I would actually possibly agree that democracy itself isn't the final objective. But you cannot achieve or guarantee that you maintain any of the real final objectives (like those that guy stated, liberty, peace and prosperity) without democracy. So democracy is still an important objective. yeah, Democracy just happens to be the best way to achieve liberty, peace and prosperity. Exactly.
|
So, it's been announced that the second debate on Oct 15th will be virtual, and Trump called into a show to say he wouldn't do a virtual debate. Not sure what will happen, but there's a very good chance it doesn't happen at all.
|
Obscenely tone deaf. I wonder to what conclusion average people would come if they polled them whose time was wasted last time around Trump was "live" on the debate stage.
|
CNN reported that the plan is to just have a townhall without Trump now.
Trump is planning on holding a rally instead.
|
Is it even democracy if half the population doesn't vote?
|
On October 08 2020 22:55 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2020 22:52 Simberto wrote: I would actually possibly agree that democracy itself isn't the final objective. But you cannot achieve or guarantee that you maintain any of the real final objectives (like those that guy stated, liberty, peace and prosperity) without democracy. So democracy is still an important objective. yeah, Democracy just happens to be the best way to achieve liberty, peace and prosperity. So far it appears to also be the only way.
On October 08 2020 23:44 GreenHorizons wrote: Is it even democracy if half the population doesn't vote?
Yes, lots of authoritarian countries have higher % of voters.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_North_Korea
Summary of the 10 March 2019 North Korea Supreme People's Assembly election results Alliance Party Votes % Seats Democratic Front for the Reunification of Korea General Association of Korean Residents in Japan 5 Others 682 Total 100 687 Registered voters/turnout 99.99 – Source:[18][17]
|
On October 08 2020 22:52 Simberto wrote: I would actually possibly agree that democracy itself isn't the final objective. But you cannot achieve or guarantee that you maintain any of the real final objectives (like those that guy stated, liberty, peace and prosperity) without democracy. So democracy is still an important objective.
I don't think it makes a ton of sense for rightwingers to support democracy, it's the opposite of a meritocratic system. Benevolent AI that leads society in the right direction is what's more logical there in terms of ideology.
|
On October 08 2020 23:48 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2020 22:52 Simberto wrote: I would actually possibly agree that democracy itself isn't the final objective. But you cannot achieve or guarantee that you maintain any of the real final objectives (like those that guy stated, liberty, peace and prosperity) without democracy. So democracy is still an important objective. I don't think it makes a ton of sense for rightwingers to support democracy, it's the opposite of a meritocratic system. Benevolent AI that leads society in the right direction is what's more logical there in terms of ideology. Why do rightwingers want a meritocracy and how can you say that with a strait face while looking at the clusterfuck of unqualified people that is the Trump administration.
|
On October 09 2020 00:01 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2020 23:48 Nebuchad wrote:On October 08 2020 22:52 Simberto wrote: I would actually possibly agree that democracy itself isn't the final objective. But you cannot achieve or guarantee that you maintain any of the real final objectives (like those that guy stated, liberty, peace and prosperity) without democracy. So democracy is still an important objective. I don't think it makes a ton of sense for rightwingers to support democracy, it's the opposite of a meritocratic system. Benevolent AI that leads society in the right direction is what's more logical there in terms of ideology. Why do rightwingers want a meritocracy and how can you say that with a strait face while looking at the clusterfuck of unqualified people that is the Trump administration.
Those are far right, not rightwingers. They don't want a meritocracy, they want them and their friends to be on top regardless of merit. A simple dictatorship is a better system for them.
|
I know plenty of right wing people who absolutely believe in democracy and quite a few left wingers who don't.
It's clear that the american right is becoming authoritarian though. That's incredibly worrying.
|
On October 08 2020 23:44 GreenHorizons wrote: Is it even democracy if half the population doesn't vote?
If it amounts to a random sample of the population (yes, that's an absolutely giant if), then yeah, you don't need even 1% of the pop voting for it to be a democratic process that correctly identifies the will of the people.
Sure, a large % of the pop voting might indicate there isn't disenfranchisement of minorities, but it's also no guarantee.
|
On October 08 2020 23:44 GreenHorizons wrote: Is it even democracy if half the population doesn't vote? Depends. If they just can't be bothered to do it, yes. If they are suppressed, no.
|
On October 09 2020 00:13 Sbrubbles wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2020 23:44 GreenHorizons wrote: Is it even democracy if half the population doesn't vote? If it amounts to a random sample of the population (yes, that's an absolutely giant if), then yeah, you don't need even 1% of the pop voting for it to be a democratic process that correctly identifies the will of the people. That's fair. We know it's not a random sample in the US though, so we can't use that to call it democracy.
|
A democracy that doesn't engage its citizen or where many people don't vote is an unhealthy democracy. It's still a democracy though.
|
|
|
|