Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
At our founding, there was a general disdain for the voting public.That is one of the reasons it was a mistake.
It was set up as a check and balance against the prospect of the central government becoming too powerful. We were not designed as a democracy. Great thought was given, in fact, to avoid the risk of a tyranny of a majority. Federalism was part of that.
And, again, of course, there is no need for a bicameral legislative body at all if your notions were true. They aren’t.
The senate is actually more representative of their states than under the old system. Before, being selected by the legislature, meant a gerrymandered state, could pick a gerrymandered senator. But under direct election, the senator has to have the majority support of everyone in his state.The Senate was designed not to have the Senators represent the People of their respective States; but to have them represent the entirety of their respective States.
The Amendment which changed all that (by having Senators elected by the vote of the people of their respective States) was a stupid American mistake. With that change, their is no real reason anymore for Congress to be bicameral. The change undermined the check and balance of Federalism to a large degree, too.
A bad mistake.
Now. But the way it was originally set up, the Legislature spoke for the interest of the State. As it should be.
Bullshit. If there was a general disdain, they didn’t have to include any notion about the People’s voice in determining our own leaders and representative. But that’s not how they framed things. So, don’t be so dishonest.At our founding, there was a general disdain for the voting public.
They distrusted the ability of the general public to choose representatives.
Eventually, We the people won out
Actually there was a great need. As what it did was give the smallest of states, the same representation as the largest of states. Wyoming and Alaska, have the same voting power as California and New York. It gave the 7 smallest states, greater power than the 6 largest states.And, again, of course, there is no need for a bicameral legislative body at all if your notions were true. They aren’t.
The legislature is closer to the people of the state than the governor since they are generally elected by the people of various smaller component portions of the State. There may not be a perfect system, but the presumption was that the legislature would (collectively) express the will of the People overall.Actually the legislature spoke for the interest of the party in control. Maybe you're upset when the people of a state choose a democrat for the senate, while having chosen republicans to run the legislature, and even the governorship.
For example Georgia.
Both parties reject each other.The new republican party is one that rejects everything democrat. Just look at Merick Garland, who had support from republicans as well as democrats, and would have been confirmed if given a floor vote. But republican opposition means if Jesus Christ himself was up for a senate vote, the republicans would universally oppose because he supported higher taxes, welfare, and universal healthcare.
Rightwinger is right. They set up that except for the house of representatives, aka the peoples house. The people would have little say as to who their elected leaders were. Whether it was their senator, chosen by their legislature, or the president, chosen by the electors, who were again originally chosen by their legislature, the people were out of the loop.Bullshit. If there was a general disdain, they didn’t have to include any notion about the People’s voice in determining our own leaders and representative. But that’s not how they framed things. So, don’t be so dishonest.
Actually, I agree. That was one of the reasons for Congress being bicameral.Actually there was a great need. As what it did was give the smallest of states, the same representation as the largest of states. Wyoming and Alaska, have the same voting power as California and New York. It gave the 7 smallest states, greater power than the 6 largest states.
The legislature gets to draw it's own electoral lines. They can choose their electors, rather than the electors choosing their legislature. Much fairer for the people to choose who represents them in the senate, in a way that can't be manipulated by those in power. A senator needs the majority vote of everyone in his state, and holds no loyalty to anyone but the people.The legislature is closer to the people of the state than the governor since they are generally elected by the people of various smaller component portions of the State. There may not be a perfect system, but the presumption was that the legislature would (collectively) express the will of the People overall.
Why this is hard for you I cannot say.
Both parties reject each other.
No. Leftwhiner is wrong. The Senate was originally set up to be selected in a manner different than direct election. Akin to the selection of our Presidents, ie, indirectly.Rightwinger is right. They set up that except for the house of representatives, aka the peoples house. The people would have little say as to who their elected leaders were. Whether it was their senator, chosen by their legislature, or the president, chosen by the electors, who were again originally chosen by their legislature, the people were out of the loop.
No. It is not much “fairer.” It is simply less “democratic” in the sense of being another step removed from a direct election.The legislature gets to draw it's own electoral lines. They can choose their electors, rather than the electors choosing their legislature. Much fairer for the people to choose who represents them in the senate, in a way that can't be manipulated by those in power. A senator needs the majority vote of everyone in his state, and holds no loyalty to anyone but the people.
LOL. Democrats even refute members of their own party, including Manchin, Sinema, and others.I would offer to refute that. As you need only count the number of democrats who voted with republicans, when the republicans were the majority, and the almost total lack of republicans voting with the democrats, when the democrats were in control.
You're making his point. That most of the federal government, save the house of representatives, was chosen indirectly. By ways swayed by political forces, rather than by the will of the people.No. Leftwhiner is wrong. The Senate was originally set up to be selected in a manner different than direct election. Akin to the selection of our Presidents, ie, indirectly.
This wasn’t done accidentally. And the concern of the Framers wasn’t misguided or mistaken. It was very consciously about separating powers to avoid abuses of power and to avoid things like a tyranny of the majority.
They were never a majority - Majority in U.S. Supports Biden COVID-19 Vaccine MandatesSo, let me get this straight
Your “Silent Majority” responds to losing elections by Civil War
Doesn‘t seem like a majority does it?
The senate, by the 17th amendment is by direct election.No. It is not much “fairer.” It is simply less “democratic” in the sense of being another step removed from a direct election.
Actually, it was a very restricted “peoples voice”Bullshit. If there was a general disdain, they didn’t have to include any notion about the People’s voice in determining our own leaders and representative.
I am refuting his point. Like you, he seeks more direct small d democracy. We aren’t a democracy. We carefully avoided it for very good reason. We prefer that government be on the smaller size (since we distrust the possible abuses of concentrated power), and therefore we demand our say in who represents us. But even then, we seek to keep in check the prospect of the representatives becoming the “masters.” So, we installed several manners of safeguards.You're making his point. That most of the federal government, save the house of representatives, was chosen indirectly. By ways swayed by political forces, rather than by the will of the people.
Yeah. I know. I already printed that out on this thread. But thanks for repeating what’s already part of the discussion.The senate, by the 17th amendment is by direct election.
