More Ballot Referendums in the Future?

[Aggies Coach]

Direct democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.

Tyranny of the majority is still tyranny. The point is to force those with power to build broad coalitions. If that can't be done, it's probably for a good reason. Gridlock is better than tyranny.

Why would you support removing the safeguards that protect the minority?

So why vote ??? If the minority can control the majority ??? Somehow Government was able to work without the Filibuster for many years. What changed now ???

[buckengr]

So why vote ??? If the minority can control the majority ??? Somehow Government was able to work without the Filibuster for many years. What changed now ???

Uh, yeah. The point of this system is to moderate extremism, which is exactly what it is doing. The Democrats have become progressive extremists and are being narrowly restrained from implementing their extreme progressive agenda by the Republicans plus the few (single?) moderate Democrat. They do not have the broad coalition to make change because their ideas are fucking bonkers insane and would destroy this country.

Still, they are trying very hard to fool people into suspending the rules like the filibuster and the Electoral College and even fair and honest elections so that they can get their way. And the fools are eager to oblige them.

So why vote? Vote because not voting enables the fucking bonkers policies to be implemented. Vote to stop the insanity.

Government isn't fundamentally a force for good. That is a myth.

Government is supposed to be the protector of rights, not the oppressor. Not the provider. Not the parent which steals from one child to give to the sibling who didn't work as hard in the name of "fairness". We have lost our way. So yes, gridlock is preferable to driving full speed off a cliff. I'm just praying we wake the fuck up before its too late.

[theshadow]

So why vote ??? If the minority can control the majority ??? Somehow Government was able to work without the Filibuster for many years. What changed now ???

Umm Strawman unfactual post. The Filibuster dates back to the FIRST Congress. the difference being up till recently, in order to Filibuster, those desiring had to stand in the well and talk, they could talk about ANYTHING, reading from a book, weather, anything to take up time. Now, based on a rule proposed and adopted (by a Dem majority if I remember correct) a sitting Senator only need express their intent to Filibuster and it's treated the same. The intent was while someone was "Filibustering" other business could proceed and a coalition could be built to end the filibuster. So long story short, true democracies do NOT stand the test of time because they are a legal form of mob rule. Representative Republics (which this nation is), has checks on that to prevent mob overreach.

[normanvin]

I think I like the idea. But they will figure out how to discount votes

[theshadow]

I think I like the idea. But they will figure out how to discount votes

they don't need to figure a way, Just look at our lovely Senators and Governor, once the votes are cast they ignore the will of the constituents.

[Aggies Coach]

Umm Strawman unfactual post. The Filibuster dates back to the FIRST Congress. the difference being up till recently, in order to Filibuster, those desiring had to stand in the well and talk, they could talk about ANYTHING, reading from a book, weather, anything to take up time. Now, based on a rule proposed and adopted (by a Dem majority if I remember correct) a sitting Senator only need express their intent to Filibuster and it's treated the same. The intent was while someone was "Filibustering" other business could proceed and a coalition could be built to end the filibuster. So long story short, true democracies do NOT stand the test of time because they are a legal form of mob rule. Representative Republics (which this nation is), has checks on that to prevent mob overreach.

So basically, grid lock is better than functioning Government ??? Second, I was speaking of of the Filibuster in its current form. Republicans and Democrats aren’t going to do shit, because this country is so divided it doesn’t matter what it is, the other side will oppose it. We so badly need a third party. Cause both sides here suck. Yea, yea……I get it, Democrats are evil and yada, yada, yada. This government flat out sucks and if I could take my service to it back I would.

[EFK]

We so badly need a third party.

You can say that again.

[buckengr]

So basically, grid lock is better than functioning Government ???

Correct, assuming by "functioning" you really mean doing all the shit government currently tries to do that goes beyond protecting and defending the natural human rights of its citizens. Because that's where its "authority" ends.

You acknowledge the government sucks, but yet you want it to continue to take action for taking action's sake? That's nonsensical.

The clamor to "do something" is the refrain from leftist opportunistic activists who seize every chance to try to push gun control, even though it would have zero effect on crime. Creating a sense of urgency is one of the most effective strategies to get foolish people to do things they wouldn't otherwise do--that's why it is a favorite of scam artists and phishing emails. This is no different.

Why do you embrace just "doing something" in any other situation?

Gridlock IS a function of our form of government. It is designed to help stop the kind of batshit crazy ideas espoused by the extremist progressives that make up almost the entire Democratic party since implementing them would destroy this country. A large portion of this country has been fooled, but not a supermajority. And that is the point. Gridlock so far has (mostly) saved us from the worst abuses. For how much longer, who knows.

[normanvin]

So basically, grid lock is better than functioning Government ??? Second, I was speaking of of the Filibuster in its current form. Republicans and Democrats aren*t going to do shit, because this country is so divided it doesn*t matter what it is, the other side will oppose it. We so badly need a third party. Cause both sides here suck. Yea, yea**I get it, Democrats are evil and yada, yada, yada. This government flat out sucks and if I could take my service to it back I would.

Define functional. What is acceptable? If they think they can save money by picking up your trash once a month instead of once a week. It's a functional system but is it acceptable.

[Walleye Hunter]

If functional means boys in the girls' locker rooms, turning in guns and petroleum powered vechicles, etc, I'll take gridlock.