It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Gerrymandering the Democrat Way

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 12:34 AM

originally posted by: Gryphon66
It's so common now to write off bad political practices by saying "but both sides do it."

What happened to the general playground principle of "two wrongs don't make a right"?

In politics there is no right. Any time we have a presidential election you'll have the pundits on TV talking about how democracy in action is a beautiful thing totally forgetting everything that lead up to the vote. Politics, especially in a democratic system of government is an ugly thing full of the most despicable tactics one can imagine, and each dirty tactic justifies the next.

There's two things you never let the public see made: sausages and laws.

In each national election that we've seen in the last few cycles, Democrats win by millions in the popular vote, but still lose in representation?

The power of the minority is a thing to be respected and it is the best and perhaps sole redeeming quality of our system as it currently stands. Majority rule is mob rule. I'm not saying the representation matches up perfectly but simple majorities shouldn't confer all the power.
edit on 18-11-2014 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 10:10 AM
a reply to: Aazadan

But it's not simple majorities that we're talking about.

In a republican system of government, our representatives are chosen by popular vote. So the number of popular votes cast SHOULD be the determining factor of who is elected to represent us, yes?

I'm not suggesting by any stretch of the imagination that we just let the majority's opinion on any matter rule the day, like on American Idol or something, but what I AM saying is that there is considerable and, in my opinion, intentional inequalities in our electoral system ... that is removing the reality of "representative democratic republic."

For example, the parliamentary systems in Europe seem to be preserving the rule of law just fine with proportional representation, as would our own system if it wasn't being manipulated at the State level.

posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 06:58 PM
a reply to: Gryphon66

If you cant understand the equability in a district division and how that balances out closer to the true will of the people look into it.

For example there are more voters in metropolitan areas. They have their own concerns one way or another. But 50 miles away its a rural district with its own issues to consider but far less votes. The majority in the rural area is really more important there than the majority in the metro area and visa versa. So to balance power they give each a seat in the house. Otherwise you would be certain to have folks being ruled by the votes of folks that have no idea about whats good for the other districts and no voice to represent them. A republic like ours reflects reality in the "we the people in order to form a more perfect government" not rule by the disassociated who have more numbers.

I cant even believe someone has to explain this to a poster that engages in these sort of political discussions. Did they not teach you that in high school? Do they not teach this anymore? Its like very basic and fundamental to understanding our form of government. Its like 2+2 math its so basic.

edit on 19-11-2014 by Logarock because: n

<< 1  2   >>

log in