Agreed. I also don't quite buy the premise of the article - see https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/28/us/politics/kamala-harris-donald-trump-2024-election.html / https://archive.is/EwIkC for the positive vibes and optimism that Harris's own campaign is seeing by going this route.
abff08f4813c
joined 3 months ago
This is wrong and has been debunked many times.
See for example https://www.thoughtco.com/republic-vs-democracy-4169936 or https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/11/yes-constitution-democracy/616949/ (archive: https://archive.is/FbuL5 )
Granted, some specific decisions like the EC could have gone better. But overall, the US is a democracy - specifically a representative democracy.
In fact, to say otherwise is a major GOP talking point. For example (from the Atlantic article),
Republicans such as Senator Mike Lee of Utah have taken to reminding the public that “we’re not a democracy.”
It is quaint that so many Republicans, embracing a president who routinely tramples constitutional norms, have suddenly found their voice in pointing out that, formally, the country is a republic.
Of course the counter example is a theocratic republic. A living example? The Islamic Republic of Iran.
Iran citizens living in Iran vote for their President, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Iranian_presidential_election#Opinion_polling_and_forecasts
They also vote for their version of "member of Congress" (ok so they don't call it Congress), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_districts_of_Iran & https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Consultative_Assembly#Constituencies
But while the President of Iran is the head of government there, he's second to the divinely appointed supreme leader, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Leader_of_Iran (in practice the SL appoints members to a Guardians Council, who vet approve members of the Assembly of Experts, who reappoint the SL - a bunch of silly layers for the SL to basically elect himself) - so this is a republic where folks technically have their representatives but the power lies elsewhere.
Exactly. The most common rebuttal I've heard to this is that the word "democracy" doesn't appear in the U.S. Constitution. However, other ideas like "freedom of religion" and "separation of powers" also do not appear as exact quotes in the Constitution.
Instead, the concept embodied by these phrases do exist and are written into the very fabric of the Constitution.
Here's a link which explains it best: https://www.thoughtco.com/republic-vs-democracy-4169936
The United States, while basically a republic, is best described as a “representative democracy.”
Also, back in the founders era, they would have understood democracy to mean what we today consider direct democracy. They thought that was too messy (to have every citizen vote on every new law etc) which is why went with a slightly different model. So they went with representative democracy instead of direct democracy. Even the Electoral College technically fits with this definition - we use the statewide popular vote (direct voting) to pick our representatives, the electors, who will represent us in the vote for the US President and VP. (Except for the two states that do it by district and split their EC votes, but in that case it's the district wide popular vote that picks the representative.)
The problem here is that it seems some coercive measures were used (e.g. being threatened with unaffordable hotel bills) which probably got at least some workers to canvas for a candidate whom they didn't support. (It also explains why some felt compelled to cheat, though in this instance I wasn't really feeling bad about it either way.)
Ultimately this is what we want though - CItizens United (2010) meant big money was able to get into play. So it's good when that big money for MAGA instead ends up wasted like this - less money for the other side to competently defeat Harris.
One thing to remember is that the bar for the SC to explain themselves is low. It's probably much higher in the court of public opinion than it is in .. you know, actual courts. (Since the lower courts have to follow their words and not the other way around.) When they do speak, there's very little that can stop them.
They could have said something like, "We find that the mere option of same-day voting registration being available is enough to satisfy the intent of the 1993 National Voter Registration Act and thus the 90-day rule should be treated as not being violated."
That would have opened the doors for Republican States to purge their rolls the same way as Virginia has, while enacting same-day voting registration on paper (thus providing the option) - but combined with ridiculous ID rules that make it next to impossible to actually do so.
Or worse, they could have said "We find that a non citizen voting is in fact unconstitutional, and for that reason we overturn this part of the 1993 National Voter Registration Act - the 90 day rule may no longer be enforced."
Even if he didn't vote illegally prior to becoming a US citizen (and I suspect he wouldn't have even if he had known about it, since that sort of thing can actually prevent you from becoming a US citizen, see https://forums.immigration.com/threads/voting-before-naturalization-can-cause-you-problems.280618/ )
It's still very and deeply ironic that he's obsessed with finding crimes involving voting/voters (such as voter fraud) in the present day while he's committing crimes involving voting/voters today (that whole Penn lottery thing).
So heavy checkmark and enjoy your upvote!
So an hour later, while logged out (in incognito mode) I am seeing your post on https://slrpnk.net/c/[email protected] and can find it on your home instance directly at https://slrpnk.net/post/14701745 - this is in addition to seeing it on https://lemmy.ca/c/woodworking and directly on the magazine's instance at https://lemmy.ca/post/31909201
Also, the post likewise shows up for me when I view your profile on either your home instance at https://slrpnk.net/u/technomad or on the magazine's instance at https://lemmy.ca/u/[email protected] (and again, that's logged out and in incognito mode).
Finally, I see your post on lemmy.world in the same three places - the magazine https://lemmy.world/c/[email protected] , your profile https://lemmy.world/u/[email protected] , and the direct post itself https://lemmy.world/post/21403325
Sometimes posts from lemmy.world take up to three days to federate to my instance, so an hour isn't too bad really.
Ah, this makes sense. Good to hear that folks were successfully pushing back and getting the vote out! I'll keep my fingers crossed for a repeat of the successes this time.
Hmm, good point, even if they did mention it, it might have just gotten buried under all the pandemic related news ...
Oh, agreed. Should have a way to punish someone for trying (e.g. attempted murder charges because the police stopped the murder and saved the intended victim). But even then, one still has to be able to prove it, and the level of proof - beyond a reasonable doubt - is as high as it is for good reason.
Now, if the accused had encountered police detectives at that polling station instead of real election workers, I imagine it would have gone like this:
(Police detective posing as a poll worker prepares an otherwise blank but non-obviously spoiled ballot.)
"Ok sir, here's your ballot."
Choice A: "Thanks, here's the ballot, yay I just voted." "Sir, you're under arrest."
Choice B: "Um... actually I already voted." "Yes we know sir, I see it right here, but we were just testing you." "No, hey, wait, I was trying to test you." "..."
It's not a reasonable expectation to ask actual election workers - poll working volunteers - to do anything like the above, though.
Note that the event was at 11:30 AM today
From https://www.coinspeaker.com/bitcoin-whitepaper-16-satoshi-nakamoto-hoax/ it explains,
Bitcoin Whitepaper Is 16 amid Fresh Satoshi Nakamoto Hoax
The identity of Bitcoin Founder Satoshi Nakamoto remains a mystery unsolved.
Updated Oct 31, 2024 at 12:59 PM
Edit:
Here's another source with a few more details, https://cryptoslate.com/london-satoshi-reveal-unsurprisingly-fails-to-convince-anyone-of-his-identity-amid-fraud-charges/
London Satoshi reveal unsurprisingly fails to convince anyone of his identity amid fraud charges
Stephen Mollah's attempt to prove he's Satoshi Nakamoto falls flat in London.
First, that fits Harris.
Second, the two party system currently means only these who have a realistic chance of winning. So there's no alternative except to waste a protest vote.