Democrats won popular vote in the Senate, too

[Adam White]

"We lost, but it doesn't matter" should be the Democrats' official motto. I think it already is in Florida.

But if you get more votes than the other guy and still lose, how do you fix it?

With the electoral college, the solution could be replacing it with actual voting. With the Senate, there's nothing to fix, it's working as it should.

Yes. The only issue I could see is if there was excessive gerrymandering. But that's a different issue from what it appears the article is about. In fact, I don't quite get the point of the article.

[Tacachale]

"We lost, but it doesn't matter" should be the Democrats' official motto. I think it already is in Florida.

But if you get more votes than the other guy and still lose, how do you fix it?

With the electoral college, the solution could be replacing it with actual voting. With the Senate, there's nothing to fix, it's working as it should.

Yes. The only issue I could see is if there was excessive gerrymandering. But that's a different issue from what it appears the article is about. In fact, I don't quite get the point of the article.

There is excessive gerrymandering.  It goes back to computer aided voting models in the late 1990s and led Karl Rove to boast about permanent majorities for the republicans (despite the popular votes).

The point of the article, obviously is to contextualize the temper of the public and to examine whether any mandate at all exists for the current (shifting) agenda of the Republican Party.

Is there a mandate?

The popular votes in all three elected parts of our government says no.

There is no gerrymandering in the Senate, as there are no districts. All votes are statewide.

[Adam White]

"We lost, but it doesn't matter" should be the Democrats' official motto. I think it already is in Florida.

But if you get more votes than the other guy and still lose, how do you fix it?

With the electoral college, the solution could be replacing it with actual voting. With the Senate, there's nothing to fix, it's working as it should.

Yes. The only issue I could see is if there was excessive gerrymandering. But that's a different issue from what it appears the article is about. In fact, I don't quite get the point of the article.

There is excessive gerrymandering.  It goes back to computer aided voting models in the late 1990s and led Karl Rove to boast about permanent majorities for the republicans (despite the popular votes).

The point of the article, obviously is to contextualize the temper of the public and to examine whether any mandate at all exists for the current (shifting) agenda of the Republican Party.

Is there a mandate?

The popular votes in all three elected parts of our government says no.

There is no gerrymandering in the Senate, as there are no districts. All votes are statewide.

Oh yeah, that's right! Totally forgot that.

[coredumped]

[/quote]

But the united States is a Republic, not a democracy. Never has been a democracy.

This is simply not true at all - it's a myth that is perpetuated by civics teachers.

Well you better get started correcting ALL of wikipedia! We are indeed a republic. If we were a true democracy we would have a "mob rule" type of government. We, thankfully, don't have that.

[Snufflee]

But the united States is a Republic, not a democracy. Never has been a democracy.

This is simply not true at all - it's a myth that is perpetuated by civics teachers.

Well you better get started correcting ALL of wikipedia! We are indeed a republic. If we were a true democracy we would have a "mob rule" type of government. We, thankfully, don't have that.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/05/13/is-the-united-states-of-america-a-republic-or-a-democracy/?utm_term=.315dc871c7ea

https://www.reference.com/government-politics/type-government-america-9a48e0411ab8f62e
[/quote]

[Adam White]

But the united States is a Republic, not a democracy. Never has been a democracy.

This is simply not true at all - it's a myth that is perpetuated by civics teachers.

Well you better get started correcting ALL of wikipedia! We are indeed a republic. If we were a true democracy we would have a "mob rule" type of government. We, thankfully, don't have that.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/05/13/is-the-united-states-of-america-a-republic-or-a-democracy/?utm_term=.315dc871c7ea

https://www.reference.com/government-politics/type-government-america-9a48e0411ab8f62e

SMH.

Anyway, from your own link:

Q: What type of government does America have?
A: QUICK ANSWER
The type of government that commands the United States of America is a democratic republic. The governing structure is federal, with a central national government and individual state governments.

Also, you'll find that Wikipedia agrees with what I posted and linked to:

The United States is the world's oldest surviving federation. It is a constitutional republic and representative democracy, "in which majority rule is tempered by minority rights protected by law".[270] The government is regulated by a system of checks and balances defined by the U.S. Constitution, which serves as the country's supreme legal document.[271] For 2014, the U.S. ranked 19th on the Democracy Index[272] and 17th on the Corruption Perceptions Index.[273]

Again - the words republic and democracy are not mutually exclusive. And your whole "mob rule" argument stems from artificially limiting the definition of democracy.

[Adam White]

Well you better get started correcting ALL of wikipedia! We are indeed a republic. If we were a true democracy we would have a "mob rule" type of government. We, thankfully, don't have that.

See my response to Snufflee. I didn't realise it was your comment I was actually responding to. Wikipedia agrees with me - well, with everyone who knows what he's talking about.

[Tacachale]

Unless you're advocating abolishing the Senate in favor of some other system that doesn't represent the states, it's pointless to talk about the national popular vote when discussing the Senate.

[Tacachale]

Unless you're advocating abolishing the Senate in favor of some other system that doesn't represent the states, it's pointless to talk about the national popular vote when discussing the Senate.

And yet so many bright people have been doing so for more than a hundred years.  If only you had been there to tell them.

Who has been talking about abolishing the senate?