Republicans Openly Welcome the End of Democracy

I thought it was sarcasm, until I saw what he wanted to replace it with. A cross.

That MFer was serious!!!! WTF? The truth is out, they are saying the quiet part OUT LOUD.

 

Did you vote?

135 million people did.

Where do 135 million people vote?

In a democracy.

WTFU.

 

Nope, in a Representative Republic. The founders studiously avoided "democracy" due to its potential to turn into mob rule.

 

Democracy ended at 3 - 4am November 4, 2020 when Biden 'miraculously' gained hundreds of thousands of mail ballot votes.

 

In addition to supposedly having the most votes in history he is history's first mail order pandemic *president.

 

Advance the video to the 13 minute mark. The interview with Barbara McQuade is enlightening.

 

Nope. The terms are not mutually exclusive.

 

The Founders and drafters of the Constitution thought so.

 

Their wrong.

 

Nope, they're correct.

 

Reality disagrees with you and them.

 

He's got a point - there's an important distinction between a democracy and a constitutional democratic republic. Happily, our Founders were able to distinguish between the two. Unfortunately for the French, the revolutionaries in their country did not:

THE LIBERTY OF ANCIENTS COMPARED WITH THAT OF MODERNS
by Benjamin Constant

The liberty of the ancients…consisted in exercising collectively, but directly, several parts of the complete sovereignty; in deliberating, in the public square, over war and peace; in forming alliances with foreign governments; in voting laws, in pronouncing judgments; in examining the accounts, the acts, the stewardship of the magistrates; in calling them to appear in front of the assembled people, in accusing, condemning or absolving them. But if this was what the ancients called liberty, they admitted as compatible with this collective freedom the complete subjection of the individual to the authority of the community. You find among them almost none of the enjoyments we have just seen form part of the liberty of the moderns. All private actions were submitted to a severe surveillance. No importance was given to individual independence, neither in relation to opinions, nor to labor, nor, above all, to religion…

Thus among the ancients the individual, almost always sovereign in public affairs, was a slave in all his private relations. As a citizen he decided on peace and war; as a private individual he was constrained, watched and repressed in all his movements; as a member of the collective body he interrogated, dismissed, condemned, impoverished, exiled or sentenced to death his magistrates and superiors; as a subject of the collective body he could himself be deprived of his status, stripped of his privileges, banished, put to death, by the discretionary will of the whole of which he belonged…

I said at the beginning that, through their failure to perceive these differences, otherwise well-intentioned men caused infinite evils during our long and stormy revolution…But those men had derived several of their theories from the works of two philosophers who had themselves failed to recognize the changes brought by two thousand years in the dispositions of mankind. I shall perhaps at some point examine the system of the most illustrious of these philosophers, of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and I shall show that, by transposing into our modern age an extent of social power, of collective sovereignty, which belonged to other centuries, this sublime genius, animated by the purest love of liberty, has nevertheless furnished deadly pretexts for more than one kind of tyranny…

Moreover, as we shall see, it is not to Rousseau that we must chiefly attribute the error against which I am going to argue; this is to be imputed much more to one of his successors, less eloquent but no less austere and a hundred times more exaggerated. The latter, the Abbé de Mably, can be regarded as the representative of the system that, according to the maxims of ancient liberty, demands that the citizens should be entirely subjected in order for the nation to be sovereign, and that the individual should be enslaved for the people to be free…

The men who were brought by events to the head of our revolution were, by a necessary consequence of the education they had received, steeped in ancient views that are no longer valid, which the philosophers whom I mentioned above had made fashionable…They believed that everything should give way before the collective will, and that all restrictions on individual rights would be amply compensated by participation in social power…

https://www.libertarianism.org/publications/essays/liberty-ancients-compared-moderns

 

Wrong

 

I doubt you could SPELL "reality" without spellcheck

 

Maybe you guys could get the FBI to create another fake Russian collusion scandal and illegally surveil more Americans.

If only you could have gotten your Ministry of Truth up and total control over social media, you could have saved democracy.

Maybe you could have China release another illness so that you can invoke martial law again and save democracy that way.

If that fails, you could try burning down the country again.

 

If I've learned anything from democrats investigating Trump the last 8 years or so, the Democrat in the room is always the most corrupt person in the room.

You guys tried "Metoo" nonsense and all you did was nab a bunch of democrats.

You launch a Russian collusion nonsense and all you did was nab a bunch of democrats.

Everyone that has persecuted Trump from Fani "I keeps campaign money in muh house as cash" to Stormy Daniels' wahts his name lawyer rotting in jail...

All you ever do is step on your own rakes that you laid out for your traps.

 

The fact that we are a democracy says otherwise.

 

Fact is we're not a democracy, we're a representative republic. You've been lied to.

 

How do we choose representatives?

 

Ok, let's hear what you call good reasons for doing away with democracy....

So vote him out, and convince others to do the same.

And has got you trying to excuse ending democracy....

That's not at all unique to Trump.

Trump is an egomaniacal blowhard, and he may do harm to the country if elected, but pre-emptively banning him from running for office, pretending he did "insurrection against the country" despite not being charged with that (because they know it won't stick), for certain does harm to the country, as it does harm to democracy itself. You will no longer be a democratic nation after you do that. It sets a precedent that slides into despotism. If you want to keep democracy intact, you need to defeat him at the ballot box again.

 

And how much do they follow your desires and direction? Try studying government before fifth grade.

 

How do we choose representatives?

 

That was also tongue in cheek. There is no room for humor in politics. It is a shame. It would be more entertaining we made room for some.

 

Why do you have to ask that? Everybody knows the answer.