Post history

History for martinb

USA Election

Back to topic

Current version

Posted November 09, 2016 20:35 · last edited November 09, 2016 20:36

Ryan wrote:

Oska wrote:

sthn.jeff wrote:

i wasnt aware of that. Well I suppose it has been Liberal for years now so as i say thats democracy

The indefinite tenure and overriding power of USSC Justices makes it highly undemocratic, and is going to mean harmful oppression of the rights of millions of people on the basis of religious beliefs. So much progress made for minorities is going to be undone by this.

The whole thing is undemocratic, despite what people like Leggy said above Hillary is ahead in the popular vote ATM, although vote counting isn't over yet. Other things are undemocratic. Residents of Puerto Rico, for instance, are American citizens but are not allowed to vote, in fact even if you're from the continental US but are simply living in Puerto Rico short term you're not allowed to vote, yet if you live in NZ you can. That's more than 3 million people who can't vote for some unknown reason right there.

The system was agreed apon and the same for both candidates. 

There are lots of flaws with the system- but it is an inherently democratic one. The degree to which it is democratic is what you are arguing about. 

The way Trump approached the contest by undermining the system though was not.

Previous versions

1 version
martinb edited November 09, 2016 20:36
Ryan wrote:
Oska wrote:
sthn.jeff wrote:

i wasnt aware of that. Well I suppose it has been Liberal for years now so as i say thats democracy
The indefinite tenure and overriding power of USSC Justices makes it highly undemocratic, and is going to mean harmful oppression of the rights of millions of people on the basis of religious beliefs. So much progress made for minorities is going to be undone by this.

The whole thing is undemocratic, despite what people like Leggy said above Hillary is ahead in the popular vote ATM, although vote counting isn't over yet. Other things are undemocratic. Residents of Puerto Rico, for instance, are American citizens but are not allowed to vote, in fact even if you're from the continental US but are simply living in Puerto Rico short term you're not allowed to vote, yet if you live in NZ you can. That's more than 3 million people who can't vote for some unknown reason right there.

The system was agreed apon and the same for both candidates. 

There are lots of flaws with the system- but it is an inherently democratic one. The degree to which it is democratic is what you are arguing about.