The individual states are considered a democracy. However, the presidential election is not. And before the awful 17th Amendment, senators were appointed by state legislators. Don't blame me because you believe whatever the propaganda media feeds you and you refuse to look things up on your own.
You could just as easily argue that the U.S. is a representative democracy (and you’d be right, it is). Your argument is based on specificity and comes across as a little pedantic, no offense.
Considering that the Founders specifically called it a republic, I can't think of a higher authority about the type of government that I live under.
What you call it, has nothing to do with what it is...
It’s a federal constitutional republic. It’s also a democracy. Squares are also rectangles. The element that makes it a democracy is open elections. Once again, your argument is that the word “democracy” isn’t specific enough. Do you entertain the idea that it can in fact be both? Because it is.
You could argue that people voting in their senators removes a designed stopgap. The people were supposed to elect the house while the state legislatures were supposed to elect the senators, so that one would be a control on the other. The majority of the U.S. framework was designed in a “people versus the state” fashion so as to curb the predations of both. If the people elect both the house and the senate then you effectively end up with two houses. The setup prior to the 17th was more closely related to the British framework - the House of Commons representing the interests of the people and the House of Lords representing the interests of the state (in a roundabout way, considering the aristocracy has lost much of its “teeth” in regards to influence over the last few centuries). There’s a nuanced argument to be had whether that’s a good or a bad thing.
The individual states are democracies. The United States is republic. The people who created it called it a republic. Who am I to argue with them?
The purpose of checks and balances is that all parties are represented in the government. The 17th Amendment diminished the power of the individual states. The same states that created the federal government in the first place became subjugated to their creation.
It will continue to be a republic unless the uniparty destroys it.
We’re talking about the United States as a complete entity. If it has a (sizeable) element of democratically held elections then it is a democracy by the virtue of that element. What kind of democracy is another question entirely. I can see your point, I just disagree with the way you state it. Those terms are not mutually exclusive, they’re complimentary. In the same way, the UK is a democracy, because we choose (a part) of our Parliament, but it is also a monarchy, because it has a monarch as the head of state. Heck, it’s even further sub-divided - Wales has its own government, and each county under said government has *another* government, and so on and so forth all the way down to individual cities and their city councils.
It's been called a republic from the beginning. It's even in our Pledge of Allegiance.
It is a republic. It’s also a democracy. It’s literally both. The reason why the founders generally didn’t refer to it as one is because at the time the term was synonymous with direct democracy (Madison elaborates on this in Federalist no.14). We’re not talking about direct democracy, we’re talking about representative democracy. Hamilton actually made the case for it at the time, and called it by that name in a letter to Governor Morris (1777). I quote:
When asked what kind of government did they form, Benjamin Franklin answered, "A republic, if we can keep it."
It's always confusing to me why people have such a problem calling the United States a republic. There have been numerous arguments about it on GBATemp alone. Why are people so intent on changing language?
Madison is specifically talking about direct democracy. The U.S. is, indeed, a republic. The method by which you choose your representatives is democratic, which makes the system a democracy. I don’t have an issue with you calling the U.S. what it is - it’s a federal republic. I have an issue with you not acknowledging that it’s a democracy when it demonstrably is one. That being said, we’re getting so circular here that we might get the spins, so I’ll leave it at that. Discussions about subsets and supersets are always delightfully boring.
They need to update their story to include the text Ray Epps sent to his nephew admitting he orchestrated the Capitol break in.
More double standards from you; quite in line with your mo.
Careful, showing your age and senility.
No, you're speaking your alternative facts.
Hear that BoomerTX? You're lying. Again.
Sorry just seen your from Florida as you were, good luck with Ron and Trump. It’s a good sign your now so proud of being in a republic as I believe it was your state that was most adamant that you shouldn’t join. Just a couple of hundred years and look your arguing for it well done, imagine your great grandchild will probably be where we are now some people just evolve at a slower rate, god speed moon beam ....
Oh no, what will I do now? PrivatePyle came back and tried to insult me. I guess I'm done for now.
It's not double standards if you can't prove your point.
Less than 10 years ago is not showing my age. Unless you are 12, which I doubt it, even though you write like you are.
There's no such thing as alternative facts. That's just a word the groomer media told you to say.
State the lie. You never back up any of your accusations against me because you are weak minded and have the emotional maturity of a toddler.
English isn't your first language, is it, Scooter?
The Constitution establishes a federal democratic republic form of government. That is, we have an indivisible union of 50 sovereign States. It is a democracy because people govern themselves. It is representative because people choose elected officials by free and secret ballot.
BakerMan
Xdqwerty
Psionic Roshambo
@
Xdqwerty:
