Saving our democracy, we are a republic and be glad for that.

[thatdemguy]

This thread will probably get reported by a few, but its the honest truth. Lots of people dont like the truth, but it does not change it. Its kind of a rant to show the truth.

The Democrat party and lots of people have been saying "save our democracy". Well we really need to be glad we are not one right now, we are a republic of states and of the people. We have 3 branches of .gov, each one wields a bunch of power, but 2 really matter right now ( congress and the executive ). Yes right now Scotus is in the rights hands, congress is in the rights hands, so is the presidency. But its close, and we still have protections that being a republic and having other laws/policies will protect us ( hopefully ).

So many called to end the filibuster, the Democrats did for judicial nominees. The repugs did it for Scotus nominations, we started it, they used it to drive another nail in to the coffin. If it was not for the filibuster we would be screwed, we can stop bills from becoming laws by using it. If the Democrats, like many here wanted, had ended it we would be in even bigger trouble. Being a republic that gives the minority a voice we still have a voice, the complaint here that its minority rule is now our saving grace. As for the house, its close but swinging a few over should not be too hard. The senate is is a majority repug controlled house right now, but we still have the filibuster to save us. The HOR does not have a filibuster, but it does have the original intent of the filibuster where someone needs to talk the whole time ( magic minute ).

If we had a true democracy we would not have the senate and the house to fight bills in. We all know one house will pass something knowing it will die in the other. It is used by both parties to say hey look we tried. With out the separate chambers we would be even more easily screwed.

We have huge states like California and New York that have a lot of power due to the number of House members from each. With out those coalitions the majority could walk all over us. If we only had the senate, a pure democracy based chamber we could be easily and royally stepped and stomped on.

Now the next thing, the electoral college, as many here normally want it to go away it worked but not how we wanted it to. Right now the AP says its 226 to 312, with out it it would just be rump won. To those who want the National popular vote interstate compact, well I am glad it does not exist. My state of Maryland voted for Harris, our electoral votes went to Harris, if the compact had been in effect our votes would have gone to rump. Think about how many call to do away with the electoral college, but think a little deeper and look how it would remove the voice and votes of a whole lot of people. We say make every vote get counted, well the popular vote compact does the exact opposite, at least when it goes the way this election did and if it had been in effect. Every vote in Maryland would not have counted it would have all gone to rump. Every vote in California would have gone to rump, New york, new Jersey would have gone to rump.

The last thing, screaming to expand the court. We screamed it for 6 years, now the repugs are saying "hey they wanted it lets do it", yes I have seen and read that. Right now Scotus is not good for us, imagine if they used what we said for 6 years to expand it to 13 and rump got to put in 4 more justices.

While our Government is not perfect, it is pretty damn good in effect. Do we want the European way of 5 parties all making coalitions that may not represent what those who voted in some of those members. Imagine if the green party teamed up with the pugs just to have a say, and rolled back womans rights, just so they could have a say on environmental protections.

Our Government was made to work slow, force things to take time, take working across the aisle. That stops what could be really bad from happening really fast. If was not set up like that the next 2 years would be even worse than what they maybe.

Rant done.

[Prairie Gates]

1. "The Democrat party" Oooooooooooof

[Stuckinthebush]

3. Yup

That jumped out

[Prairie Gates]

4. Many of the other points are taken straight from right wing internet discourse

We had another one on here the other day doing the whole "Oh, do you want to expand the courts NOW hahaha didn't think sooooo." Point by point, but yeah, when you start with "The Democrat Party," it's gonna be bad.

[Wounded Bear]

2. When you start with "the Democrat Party" your rant loses legitimacy from the start...nt

[thatdemguy]

5. So what should I have called it

I am saying the democrat party at the national level, meaning the party as a whole.

Sorry if you dont like a word or two I used, or how I typed it. Sorry its not the Democratic party, I trying trying to keep it separate from democratic process. Which I actually meant to use but did not when I typed it.

[zipplewrath]

8. The Democratic Party

That's it's name after all.

[Gore1FL]

9. It is known as the "Democratic Party." nt

[Gore1FL]

7. Saying we are a Republic, not a Democracy is like saying, "it's not a Jetta, it's a Volkswagen." nt

[haele]

12. Agreed. And it is a bit too soon to get into distinctions like that.

Now, if this was the old days and we could depend on a few Republicans having at least a modicum of intelligence and ethics, not to mention taking their oath to the constitution seriously, I might entertain a bit of rhetorical discussion. And then, only after said unicorns actually appear and put country or just constituant wellbeing over party.

But at this point in time, topics like the OP's aren't helping. It's smugly patronizing - and I'm a casual pedant for occasional fun and cynicism.
Let's wait to see if we still have a representative Democratic Republic or an Imperial or Oligarchic Republic after Jan 21 before we start talking about the type of government we have.
I'm not sure we will still have the government my old HS Civics textbook describes after the election is certified.

Haele

[thatdemguy]

16. Sorry you took it like that and your right about lets see what happens

We dont really know the level that rump could try to get to, lets hope how everything is set up prevents the worst that could happen.

I guess some it is my frustration and anger with the loss. And to me, what some have asked for over the last 6 year and what it could cause. We need hope that own institution of a government will survive. I just see as what some want would or could hasten its demise. I have seen too many on the right say let it crash, and over all I like our country too much to see it die.

[haele]

18. Thanks for taking it well.

I grew up around Universities and educators back when Liberal Arts was prized and rhetorical discussions were regular occurrences, so I saw where you were coming from.
I am also old enough to understand the various levels of hurt going on.

Haele

[Zeitghost]

10. I have long warned

That concepts like State's Rights and filibusters that people here and generally on the left hated would eventually become useful when the political pendulum eventually swung back to the right.

Be thankful that the Federal government can't unilaterally impose it's will on places like California and New York. It will come in usefull during the next four years.

[Fiendish Thingy]

11. Careful, your slip is showing

“Democrat party”?

The filibuster has been used by both parties to avoid accountability- if a bill never comes to a floor vote, you can never be held accountable for how you voted on the bill.

That’s why I still support killing the filibuster, even when the GOP is in power. Let’s see how courageous they are without any gridlock shield to hide behind- pass anything you want, let the people experience the consequences, and give you their feedback at the ballot box.

I still support expanding the court as well. If a tit for tat series of expansions occur when power changes hands, so be it. The bigger the court, the weaker each individual Justice becomes, and the more difficult it becomes to maintain a consistent monolithic partisan voting bloc.

[thatdemguy]

13. I agree with the expansion of the court to weaken individual justices.

The part about killing the filibuster and the "Let’s see how courageous they are without any gridlock shield to hide behind- pass anything you want, let the people experience the consequences, and give you their feedback at the ballot box." Part I dont because the damage done could be un repairable.

But back to the Scotus, I am not sure how it should be handled. More justices would be good as I said to weaken an individual justice. But just Slap happy expanding it is not the answer. Having 50 or 100 or 200 justices is where we would wind up. Maybe 20-25 and then randomly picking 9 to hear cases would work. Basically the way the lower courts handle it with panels, with the ability for the entire court if extraordinary circumstances, but that should not be the norm.

[Fiendish Thingy]

15. If the filibuster is gone almost nothing is unrepairable.

Once Dems control congress and the WH, they can ram through all the progressive legislation they want, and undo all the republican damage, just like Whitmer did in one year with a one seat majority in the state legislature.

Without the filibuster, the people would clearly see and more importantly, experience the removal and restoration of rights, benefits and overall good governance when different parties assume power. Right now for many, figuring out who is better at governing depends more on propaganda than actual personal experience.

[morillon]

14. A shibboleth

In general, calling it the "Democrat" party instead of the "Democratic" party is a shibboleth, identifying the speaker as a member of the Newt Gingrich/Rush Limbaugh school of thought, or at least as someone who hangs out with people who talk that way and hasn't questioned why it's offensive to Democrats.

[thatdemguy]

17. Again sorry for a mis type

I had it written in my head and meant to use some words and did not.

As for hanging around repugs, nope I grew up in PG and Montgomery county maryland. I have marched in support of Democratic candidates for close to 20 years. My mother was an executive aid to PG county council members, I have been a registered democrat for who knows how long.

When I thought my job was going to go away I had job offers in red states, both the wife and I said nope.

[Prairie Gates]

19. What mistype? The reasoning you gave for using the term is the Republican /right wing reason

You said

I am saying the democrat party at the national level, meaning the party as a whole.

Sorry if you dont like a word or two I used, or how I typed it. Sorry its not the Democratic party, I trying trying to keep it separate from democratic process. Which I actually meant to use but did not when I typed it.

Why would you want to separate the Democratic Party from the democratic process? That was Gingrich and Luntz's reason for using the term? It's not a mistype., You believe that the name of the party should be separated from the idea of thedemocratic process, right? I mean, you said so in this very thread!