Dictatorship or Democracy? - 2022 Election

As the Republicians ride roughshod over the will of the people in the States they control with help of the now corrupted US Federal Courts the choice in the 2022 election has become clear.

A vote for any Republician is a vote for a Dictatorship!

Now the Democratics are not angels at all, but they do have one redeaming belief, which is a belief in democracy.

2022 is turning into an election where we are not voting on policies at all, but on what form of government we support.

So dramatic.

NumbersDude wrote:So dramatic.

The Republicians are supressing the vote, are using political power to attack business regarding freedom of expression issues, supported overthowing the Presidential election, have packed the federal courts with RWNJ judges who are ruling not on the law but.from political positions and have been working to achieve all of this for 40 years or more.

It may sound dramatic, but reality, when a idelogy is attacking sociaty, sometimes is.

If you want to be the frog in the slowly warming pot of water, ignore what they are doing.

Trapper Gus wrote:

NumbersDude wrote:So dramatic.

The Republicians are supressing the vote, are using political power to attack business regarding freedom of expression issues, supported overthowing the Presidential election, have packed the federal courts with RWNJ judges who are ruling not on the law but.from political positions and have been working to achieve all of this for 40 years or more.

It may sound dramatic, but reality, when a idelogy is attacking sociaty, sometimes is.

If you want to be the frog in the slowly warming pot of water, ignore what they are doing.

So you are saying the 2022 election is about a dictatorship? But no dictator is on the ballot? Its not a presidential election year.

Who do you think the even Rs are grooming to be this dictator? The orange baffoon?

NumbersDude wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

The Republicians are supressing the vote, are using political power to attack business regarding freedom of expression issues, supported overthowing the Presidential election, have packed the federal courts with RWNJ judges who are ruling not on the law but.from political positions and have been working to achieve all of this for 40 years or more.

It may sound dramatic, but reality, when a idelogy is attacking sociaty, sometimes is.

If you want to be the frog in the slowly warming pot of water, ignore what they are doing.

So you are saying the 2022 election is about a dictatorship? But no dictator is on the ballot? Its not a presidential election year.

Who do you think the even Rs are grooming to be this dictator? The orange baffoon?

The Repuician Party is really owned by a group of very wealthy people who tell the elected how to vote.  Yes Trump was their guy, but the "who" is not as important as the "what they do".

After Trump was elected this group of wealthy people dictated to him whom to put in positions throughout the government.  These are the tools of the wealthy who are the gears of the machine which executes their orders.  Some, such as cabinet level & federal judges are obvious, but the "game" is to embed as many as possible.  Right now Republicians are blocking as many of Biden's appointments as possible to allow those embedded Republicians to keep running the government.

To gain a dictatorship was in their grasp in 2020, and only the probity of the then VP stopped it.  They are now purging those who have any ethics and training the next generation of politicians, who start at the state level, to follow their orders.

2022, if the Repubicians gain more power, will see a tipping point, where they all just take orders from the guy at the top, whomever that is.

It sounds crazy unless you have been paying close attention.  If you have then it is obvious.

Republicans nominate election denial darling for SOS post.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/sarahmimms/karmao-michigan-secretary-of-state-election-denial

Karamo, a professor of public speaking, built her profile and campaign on allegations of fraud in the last election and by claiming to have witnessed it herself as a poll challenger in Detroit. She was featured on Fox News’ Hannity in December 2020 as a “whistleblower” where she recounted watching Detroit elections officials take a ballot that was marked straight-ticket for both parties and count it for Biden. But as former Michigan elections director Chris Thomas later explained to the Guardian, the ballot wasn’t counted for Biden, it was tossed out as an over-vote.

kingstonlake wrote:Republicans nominate election denial darling for SOS post.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/sarahmimms/karmao-michigan-secretary-of-state-election-denial

Karamo, a professor of public speaking, built her profile and campaign on allegations of fraud in the last election and by claiming to have witnessed it herself as a poll challenger in Detroit. She was featured on Fox News’ Hannity in December 2020 as a “whistleblower” where she recounted watching Detroit elections officials take a ballot that was marked straight-ticket for both parties and count it for Biden. But as former Michigan elections director Chris Thomas later explained to the Guardian, the ballot wasn’t counted for Biden, it was tossed out as an over-vote.

Numbersdude - This is one of the paths to dictatorship.  Convincing people that what was mostly likely the best run election ever was a fraud.

Trapper Gus wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:Republicans nominate election denial darling for SOS post.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/sarahmimms/karmao-michigan-secretary-of-state-election-denial

Numbersdude - This is one of the paths to dictatorship.  Convincing people that what was mostly likely the best run election ever was a fraud.

You mean where the voting system in many states drastically changed? Due to C19? Or the russian interference election.
Sour grapes and tantrums at the national level started in 2016 and continues to 22.

Pay no attention to the man in the White House. It's all about the Republicans!

NumbersDude wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Numbersdude - This is one of the paths to dictatorship.  Convincing people that what was mostly likely the best run election ever was a fraud.

You mean where the voting system in many states drastically changed? Due to C19? Or the russian interference election.
 Sour grapes and tantrums at the national level started in 2016 and continues to 22.

I mean the lies about fraud in 2020, which have continued.  Without any factual evidence to support the cried of "fraud" and with a numbet of fully audited States, such as AZ & MI, which showed no fraud, thus refuting the accusations, over 50% of Republicians believe there was fraud and the 2020 election was stolen from Trump by fraudulent counting of ballots.

The 2016 is not at all the same.  While there probably was some grumbling about the counting in 2016, and as I recall, for some reason it was from the Green Party, it quickly died down.  What did happen in 2016 is that Putin flooded the internets with false information about Clinton & the Trump campaign worked hand in glove with Putin to make that as effective as possible, which is illeagal, btw. When Trump is called illegitimate this is what it is about, not the voting itself.

NumbersDude wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Numbersdude - This is one of the paths to dictatorship.  Convincing people that what was mostly likely the best run election ever was a fraud.

You mean where the voting system in many states drastically changed? Due to C19? Or the russian interference election.
Sour grapes and tantrums at the national level started in 2016 and continues to 22.

You are calling the increased use of absentee ballots a drastic change? Absentee ballots have been in use for a long time, at least back as far as the War of Rebellion where the Union Army voted overwhelmingly for Lincoln.

Bredo Morstoel wrote:Pay no attention to the man in the White House. It's all about the Republicans!

As I said in the OP, the Democratics are not angels, however, only the Republicians want a total dictatorship.

Trapper Gus wrote:

NumbersDude wrote:

You mean where the voting system in many states drastically changed? Due to C19? Or the russian interference election.
Sour grapes and tantrums at the national level started in 2016 and continues to 22.

You are calling the increased use of absentee ballots a drastic change? Absentee ballots have been in use for a long time, at least back as far as the War of Rebellion where the Union Army voted overwhelmingly for Lincoln.

Civil War and Lincoln? Its a stretch.
https://ballotpedia.org/Changes_to_election_dates,_procedures,_and_administration_in_response_to_the_coronavirus_(COVID-19)_pandemic,_2020

Are you concerned that the gains from your political party in 2020 will be erased?
The democratic 2020 platform was Covid 19, Racism/ Police Brutality,Orangeman.
There is a strong chance that the dems could loose bigly. The orange alert is going off in your head trapper.

Party in power typically takes in in the chops in off year elections when economic factors are decent to good.

A recession, regardless of the cause often makes those losses worse.

This year we have a recession. Rising prices although low unemployment. Anyone who wants a job can find one.

and a GOP where some candidates are willing to brand any opponent a pedophile or child groomer while others are going to campaigning on the “Stolen Election” lies. (See who MI’s GOP nominated for AG to oppose AG Nessel)

That liberal Mike Shirkey said nominating DePerno won’t help the GOP in the November general election.

NumbersDude wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

You are calling the increased use of absentee ballots a drastic change? Absentee ballots have been in use for a long time, at least back as far as the War of Rebellion where the Union Army voted overwhelmingly for Lincoln.

Civil War and Lincoln? Its a stretch.
https://ballotpedia.org/Changes_to_election_dates,_procedures,_and_administration_in_response_to_the_coronavirus_(COVID-19)_pandemic,_2020

Are you concerned that the gains from your political party in 2020 will be erased?
The democratic 2020 platform was Covid 19, Racism/ Police Brutality,Orangeman.
There is a strong chance that the dems could loose bigly. The orange alert is going off in your head trapper.

It wasn't a "Civil War" and it isn't a stretch as it shows a massive use of absentee ballots over 100 years ago, so the claim of a drastic change to voting system, when only certain places changed the eligibility requirements for receiving absentee ballots is the streach argument in this discussion.

A more immediate threat to the continuation of the United States is the cannard about election fraud and the Conservatives mindless acceptace of it.

btw - gaslighting people is so TOB

GRR Spartan wrote:Party in power typically takes in in the chops in off year elections when economic factors are decent to good.

A recession, regardless of the cause often makes those losses worse.

This year we have a recession. Rising prices although low unemployment. Anyone who wants a job can find one.

and a GOP where some candidates are willing to brand any opponent a pedophile or child groomer while others are going to campaigning on the “Stolen Election” lies. (See who MI’s GOP nominated for AG to oppose AG Nessel)

That liberal Mike Shirkey said nominating DePerno won’t help the GOP in the November general election.

Pretty sure a Recession is two or more quarters when GDP is falling, which hasn't happened yet during Biden.

This is a very process oriented framing, which is fine because our formal democratic institutions are broken, but our democratic culture and habits are equally as broken. When democracy dies, it will not simply be the fault of crude officials with authoritarian tendencies, but also because the people gave up on doing the hard work of democracy. Don't just blame Republicans or Democrats, also make sure to own our contributions to the death of democracy.

Turtleneck wrote:This is a very process oriented framing, which is fine because our formal democratic institutions are broken, but our democratic culture and habits are equally as broken. When democracy dies, it will not simply be the fault of crude officials with authoritarian tendencies, but also because the people gave up on doing the hard work of democracy. Don't just blame Republicans or Democrats, also make sure to own our contributions to the death of democracy.

And yet people want to vote for the same politicians that have been in Washington DC for 40+ years. If you think that democracy is fading away- look at the people who make the laws and policy that erodes American freedom with each law, each bill, each tax they enslave us with. All in the name of “protection” and “ security.
Repeal the patriot act.
End war on drugs.

Sunset all laws.

NumbersDude wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:This is a very process oriented framing, which is fine because our formal democratic institutions are broken, but our democratic culture and habits are equally as broken. When democracy dies, it will not simply be the fault of crude officials with authoritarian tendencies, but also because the people gave up on doing the hard work of democracy. Don't just blame Republicans or Democrats, also make sure to own our contributions to the death of democracy.

And yet people want to vote for the same politicians that have been in Washington DC for 40+ years.  If you think that democracy is fading away- look at the people who make the laws and policy that erodes American freedom with each law, each bill, each tax they enslave us with. All in the name of “protection” and “ security.
   Repeal the patriot act.
   End war on drugs.
   
   Sunset all laws.

What the government has done via the rules and the Consitution are not the point of the OP.

We have the Republician Party planning to overturn the votes of "the people" in various States with how they are changing the state laws regarding elections, expecially but not limited to Presidential elections.

In Michigan they have been purging anyone with probity from the county and state election certification boards, positions which don't have the power to really do anything other than to slow down the certification via refusing to do their job as defined by state law.

NumbersDude wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:This is a very process oriented framing, which is fine because our formal democratic institutions are broken, but our democratic culture and habits are equally as broken. When democracy dies, it will not simply be the fault of crude officials with authoritarian tendencies, but also because the people gave up on doing the hard work of democracy. Don't just blame Republicans or Democrats, also make sure to own our contributions to the death of democracy.

And yet people want to vote for the same politicians that have been in Washington DC for 40+ years. If you think that democracy is fading away- look at the people who make the laws and policy that erodes American freedom with each law, each bill, each tax they enslave us with. All in the name of “protection” and “ security.
Repeal the patriot act.
End war on drugs.

Sunset all laws.

You miss the point about democratic culture and habits, which have more-or-less disappeared. It's not unique to the U.S. either. It's transnational. Culturally, people do not respect democratic decisions and many cannot even meaningfully conceptualize democracy. Nor do they engage in their communities or interact with others in a way that sustains democracy. We are living in the world where Mill's "public spirit" is absent and we only think of others as rivals to our needs and interests.

However, going back to voting brings up a interesting dilemma. If voters cannot make good choices, then we need to rethink democracy. It has been argued before that voters cannot get out of their own way, cannot think rationally, and cannot articulate their own interests. For example, here and here. Some have went a step further, like this bloke, and argued for a sort of undemocratic liberalism. This is where rights, liberties, and checks on government power are vigorously protected but political power is not distributed evenly. The more knowledgeable and rational have greater say. So, for example, the voting rights of GreenWay (low-information) or Guest (high information but not interested in objective analysis of information) are curtailed or given less weight.

If the GOP take the House and/or Senate in '22, American democracy is over.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:If the GOP take the House and/or Senate in '22, American democracy is over.

So dramatic!

Did you see the story about Mike Pence refusing to get into a Secret Service vehicle on January 6 because he thought they'd keep him from getting to the Capitol to certify the election?

Definitely not a coup and totally in favor of election integrity. You'd have to be a fucking moron to believe that.

Bredo Morstoel wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:If the GOP take the House and/or Senate in '22, American democracy is over.

So dramatic!

The emotional responses here over ride simple logic how the branches of government works. Lol. But it makes for drama to get out those mid term mail in votes!

NumbersDude, Bredo, and RQA.

NumbersDude wrote:

Bredo Morstoel wrote:

So dramatic!

The emotional responses here over ride simple logic how the branches of government works. Lol. But it makes for drama to get out those mid term mail in votes!

The branches of government have been broken for a long, long time now.

Turtleneck wrote:

NumbersDude wrote:

And yet people want to vote for the same politicians that have been in Washington DC for 40+ years. If you think that democracy is fading away- look at the people who make the laws and policy that erodes American freedom with each law, each bill, each tax they enslave us with. All in the name of “protection” and “ security.
Repeal the patriot act.
End war on drugs.

Sunset all laws.

You miss the point about democratic culture and habits, which have more-or-less disappeared. It's not unique to the U.S. either. It's transnational. Culturally, people do not respect democratic decisions and many cannot even meaningfully conceptualize democracy. Nor do they engage in their communities or interact with others in a way that sustains democracy. We are living in the world where Mill's "public spirit" is absent and we only think of others as rivals to our needs and interests.

However, going back to voting brings up a interesting dilemma. If voters cannot make good choices, then we need to rethink democracy. It has been argued before that voters cannot get out of their own way, cannot think rationally, and cannot articulate their own interests. For example, here and here. Some have went a step further, like this bloke, and argued for a sort of undemocratic liberalism. This is where rights, liberties, and checks on government power are vigorously protected but political power is not distributed evenly. The more knowledgeable and rational have greater say. So, for example, the voting rights of GreenWay (low-information) or Guest (high information but not interested in objective analysis of information) are curtailed or given less weight.

I can find no rational way to impliment such a system and indeed think it is as abhorrent as what the Republicians are doing to suppress voting.

Bredo Morstoel wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:If the GOP take the House and/or Senate in '22, American democracy is over.

So dramatic!

Dramatic seems to be certain posters favorite word today.

Problem is Bob is only partly correct.  Until the Conservatives admit that everyone has equal political rights and that people who are elected to office first have the responsibly to help govern within the framework of the Constitution instead of being people whose goal is to stop the normal functions of government, democracy in this country is already dead.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

NumbersDude wrote:

The emotional responses here over ride simple logic how the branches of government works. Lol. But it makes for drama to get out those mid term mail in votes!

The branches of government have been broken for a long, long time now.

1994 to give this a date.

NumbersDude wrote:

Bredo Morstoel wrote:

So dramatic!

The emotional responses here over ride simple logic how the branches of government works. Lol. But it makes for drama to get out those mid term mail in votes!

Problem is that the Conservatives have been blocking them from working for decades, something you were bitching about a few posts back.

Now the Conservatives are going after the election process itself, trying to discredit elections as "fraud"

NumbersDude wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

The Republicians are supressing the vote, are using political power to attack business regarding freedom of expression issues, supported overthowing the Presidential election, have packed the federal courts with RWNJ judges who are ruling not on the law but.from political positions and have been working to achieve all of this for 40 years or more.

It may sound dramatic, but reality, when a idelogy is attacking sociaty, sometimes is.

If you want to be the frog in the slowly warming pot of water, ignore what they are doing.

So you are saying the 2022 election is about a dictatorship? But no dictator is on the ballot? Its not a presidential election year.

Who do you think the even Rs are grooming to be this dictator? The orange baffoon?

NumbersDude wrote:

Bredo Morstoel wrote:

So dramatic!

The emotional responses here over ride simple logic how the branches of government works. Lol. But it makes for drama to get out those mid term mail in votes!

If you knew how the "branches of government" worked, and had any knowledge of presidential systems in general, you would know a dictator does not have to actually be on the ballot for democracy to be further damaged.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:

You miss the point about democratic culture and habits, which have more-or-less disappeared. It's not unique to the U.S. either. It's transnational. Culturally, people do not respect democratic decisions and many cannot even meaningfully conceptualize democracy. Nor do they engage in their communities or interact with others in a way that sustains democracy. We are living in the world where Mill's "public spirit" is absent and we only think of others as rivals to our needs and interests.

However, going back to voting brings up a interesting dilemma. If voters cannot make good choices, then we need to rethink democracy. It has been argued before that voters cannot get out of their own way, cannot think rationally, and cannot articulate their own interests. For example, here and here. Some have went a step further, like this bloke, and argued for a sort of undemocratic liberalism. This is where rights, liberties, and checks on government power are vigorously protected but political power is not distributed evenly. The more knowledgeable and rational have greater say. So, for example, the voting rights of GreenWay (low-information) or Guest (high information but not interested in objective analysis of information) are curtailed or given less weight.

I can find no rational way to impliment such a system and indeed think it is as abhorrent as what the Republicians are doing to suppress voting.

Is the right to vote an inherent right?

Here is an interview with Brennan about his alternative to democracy, what he calls epistocracy. It's a lot of bark without much bite. In other words, for all the faults he finds with democracy - he is not wrong about voters and voter behavior - his suggested forms of epistorcacy are underwhelming and without much detail.

https://www.vox.com/2018/7/23/17581394/against-democracy-book-epistocracy-jason-brennan

Turtleneck wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

I can find no rational way to impliment such a system and indeed think it is as abhorrent as what the Republicians are doing to suppress voting.

Is the right to vote an inherent right?

Here is an interview with Brennan about his alternative to democracy, what he calls epistocracy. It's a lot of bark without much bite. In other words, for all the faults he finds with democracy - he is not wrong about voters and voter behavior - his suggested forms of epistorcacy are underwhelming and without much detail.

https://www.vox.com/2018/7/23/17581394/against-democracy-book-epistocracy-jason-brennan

There are plenty of logical justifications for a limited franchise, however there are many faults with the concept also.

Formost is that all people are people with all of the strengths, weaknesses, pride and jealousy that entails. To deny the equailty of humans to be human with the same privlages is to create a society with sigificate build in social stress, one just waiting for the rabble to be roused by the first rabblerouser to come along.

The statement, "All Men Are Created Equal" is probably the most brillent poltical statement of all time, and once said it cannot be unsaid.

Another major problem with his rathet brittle logically statement is that we have no way to determine who amoung us is quaified to vote, except some system to be defined by those who want to amass poltical power to themselves. We are not Gods or Angels who might be able to do so.

IMO what this proposes is slavery for the masses with a veneer of academic gloss to make it seem pretty.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:

Is the right to vote an inherent right?

Here is an interview with Brennan about his alternative to democracy, what he calls epistocracy. It's a lot of bark without much bite. In other words, for all the faults he finds with democracy - he is not wrong about voters and voter behavior - his suggested forms of epistorcacy are underwhelming and without much detail.

https://www.vox.com/2018/7/23/17581394/against-democracy-book-epistocracy-jason-brennan

There are plenty of logical justifications for a limited franchise, however there are many faults with the concept also.

Formost is that all people are people with all of the strengths, weaknesses, pride and jealousy that entails.  To deny the equailty of humans to be human with the same privlages is to create a society with sigificate build in social stress, one just waiting for the rabble to be roused by the first rabblerouser to come along.

The statement, "All Men Are Created Equal" is probably the most brillent poltical statement of all time, and once said it cannot be unsaid.

Another major problem with his rathet brittle logically statement is that we have no way to determine who amoung us is quaified to vote, except some system to be defined by those who want to amass poltical power to themselves.  We are not Gods or Angels who might be able to do so.

IMO what this proposes is slavery for the masses with a veneer of academic gloss to make it seem pretty.

If such a system seeks to preserve and protect rights, liberties, and checks on government power, is it slavery? Liberalism and democracy can be separated, evidenced by the existence of illiberal democracies. A proponent of epistocracy might suggest democracy has been an obstacle to achieving civil rights in this country or that democratic decision-making has led to an erosion of our civil liberties. What if democracy brings out the worst in us? "We know that an unfortunate side effect of democracy is that it incentivizes citizens to be ignorant, irrational, tribalistic, and to not use their votes in very serious ways." If this is true, some kind of reform or even a new system that offsets the negative consequences of these behaviors is certainly discussion-worthy.  

If there is no inherent right to vote, does restricted voting deny equality if other rights and liberties remain intact? Oddly, when "All men are created equal" appeared in the Declaration, natural rights were denied to many. Years later, following the ratification of the Constitution, the right to vote remained highly restricted, and that would be the case for quite some time. For such a brilliant political statement, it was essentially meaningless when written. We can give better meaning to those words today. Danielle Allen has done a great job connecting the Declaration to ideas of equality and justice, but this was not on the minds of Jefferson and his peers when it was written. So, the person and persons responsible for the statement did not see the right to vote as inherent and sought to restrict the right to vote to minimize the will of the people.

Brennan and others have talked about ways to make that determination. They have spoken about weighted and supplemental voting, enfranchisement lotteries with an educational component, veto councils, means and ends voting that limit legislator and voters' agenda-setting power, and restricted suffrage.

I don't buy into the idea of epistorcracy at all. I believe it is unnecessary, and the root of the problem is our antiquated formal political institutions, like the electoral system or presidential system, that cannot respond our more globalized and diverse political interests. However, I do sympathize with its supporters when it comes to their complaints about voter behavior in a democracy...and it is fun to talk about.

Turtleneck wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

There are plenty of logical justifications for a limited franchise, however there are many faults with the concept also.

Formost is that all people are people with all of the strengths, weaknesses, pride and jealousy that entails.  To deny the equailty of humans to be human with the same privlages is to create a society with sigificate build in social stress, one just waiting for the rabble to be roused by the first rabblerouser to come along.

The statement, "All Men Are Created Equal" is probably the most brillent poltical statement of all time, and once said it cannot be unsaid.

Another major problem with his rathet brittle logically statement is that we have no way to determine who amoung us is quaified to vote, except some system to be defined by those who want to amass poltical power to themselves.  We are not Gods or Angels who might be able to do so.

IMO what this proposes is slavery for the masses with a veneer of academic gloss to make it seem pretty.

If such a system seeks to preserve and protect rights, liberties, and checks on government power, is it slavery? Liberalism and democracy can be separated, evidenced by the existence of illiberal democracies. A proponent of epistocracy might suggest democracy has been an obstacle to achieving civil rights in this country or that democratic decision-making has led to an erosion of our civil liberties. What if democracy brings out the worst in us? "We know that an unfortunate side effect of democracy is that it incentivizes citizens to be ignorant, irrational, tribalistic, and to not use their votes in very serious ways." If this is true, some kind of reform or even a new system that offsets the negative consequences of these behaviors is certainly discussion-worthy.  

If there is no inherent right to vote, does restricted voting deny equality if other rights and liberties remain intact? Oddly, when "All men are created equal" appeared in the Declaration, natural rights were denied to many. Years later, following the ratification of the Constitution, the right to vote remained highly restricted, and that would be the case for quite some time. For such a brilliant political statement, it was essentially meaningless when written. We can give better meaning to those words today. Danielle Allen has done a great job connecting the Declaration to ideas of equality and justice, but this was not on the minds of Jefferson and his peers when it was written. So, the person and persons responsible for the statement did not see the right to vote as inherent and sought to restrict the right to vote to minimize the will of the people.

Brennan and others have talked about ways to make that determination. They have spoken about weighted and supplemental voting, enfranchisement lotteries with an educational component, veto councils, means and ends voting that limit legislator and voters' agenda-setting power, and restricted suffrage.

I don't buy into the idea of epistorcracy at all. I believe it is unnecessary, and the root of the problem is our antiquated formal political institutions, like the electoral system or presidential system, that cannot respond our more globalized and diverse political interests. However, I do sympathize with its supporters when it comes to their complaints about voter behavior in a democracy...and it is fun to talk about.

Someone, somewhere, recently pointed out that the Declaration & the Constitution are both political documents, agreed to in committee, and therefore are not "pure" by any means.

Thus, Jefferson's, if it really was Jefferson, lifting of John Locke's natural rights, which were "Life, Liberty & Property", with "Property" being replaced with "Happiness" can really only be seen as a political statement, designed to win votes and sympathy in Parliament & in England, which of course had their own revolt against the King about 100 years before.  If fact it was probably a "throw away" line, not really meant at all.

However, the intent of the Committee is meaningless.

The current understanding of the meaning of those words are what matters if we are talking about changing the political system today. as they surely will be referred to for any major change, such as the voting franchise.

The point being made is not the logical question of would limiting the vote defacto slavery.  The point is how would the newly disenfranchised feel about it, and itis certain that some would call it slavery, probably using another well known line from the Revolutionary period, "no taxation without representation".

MiamiSpartan wrote:

NumbersDude wrote:

So you are saying the 2022 election is about a dictatorship? But no dictator is on the ballot? Its not a presidential election year.

Who do you think the even Rs are grooming to be this dictator? The orange baffoon?

Dictators don't typically get elected running on a platform of dictatorship. The Nazis (sorry Travis) came to power legally and democratically. Then they went full dictator.

Dictators erode freedoms one law at a time, each law giving them more and more power. Then they drum of some enemy that only they can defeat. They must have more power to defeat and combat this enemy.
Look at history. Hilter, Pinochet, Putin, Luchenko, Xi,
Saddam, Fat Kim, Ortega, Chavez, Castro.

NumbersDude wrote:

MiamiSpartan wrote:

Dictators don't typically get elected running on a platform of dictatorship. The Nazis (sorry Travis) came to power legally and democratically. Then they went full dictator.

Dictators erode freedoms one law at a time, each law giving them more and more power. Then they drum of some enemy that only they can defeat. They must have more power to defeat and combat this enemy.
Look at history. Hilter, Pinochet, Putin, Luchenko, Xi,
Saddam, Fat Kim, Ortega, Chavez, Castro.

https://www.sos.texas.gov/elections/laws/local-laws.shtml

https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2021/90

https://codes.ohio.gov/orc/3501

Like these?

And the enemy will be, what pedophile gender reassigners and gay groomers?

AvgMSUJoe wrote:

NumbersDude wrote:

Dictators erode freedoms one law at a time, each law giving them more and more power. Then they drum of some enemy that only they can defeat. They must have more power to defeat and combat this enemy.
Look at history. Hilter, Pinochet, Putin, Luchenko, Xi,
Saddam, Fat Kim, Ortega, Chavez, Castro.

https://www.sos.texas.gov/elections/laws/local-laws.shtml

https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2021/90

https://codes.ohio.gov/orc/3501

Like these?

I don’t live in those states and did not research those issues.