- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: How would you change the Constitution to keep us from getting here?
Posted on 1/2/26 at 10:44 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 1/2/26 at 10:44 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:See, THIS could be an interesting topic.
Not all republics are democracies.
Venice might be good case study.
The Doge WAS elected, but the electorate was VERY small. What does that make it? A democratic oligarchy? An oligarchal republic?
How large must the electorate be (as a percentage of the population) to rise to the level of being some sort of democracy? If this forum were to get its way (excluding women, limitation to landowners, no votes for 1st-generation naturalized citizens, etcetera), would OUR system qualify as a democracy or as an oligarchy?
This post was edited on 1/2/26 at 10:46 am
1
Posted on 1/2/26 at 10:49 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You think they'd support a way to permit DEMs to have made Trump ineligible during the Biden admin?
That’s not what I said, Fred.
I said tightening up elections and whatnot- to better prevent fraud and ensure one man, one vote would be palatable. Even if it happened to somehow disadvantage “our guy”.
That is nowhere near the ballpark of bullshite lawfare.
Posted on 1/2/26 at 10:51 am to Jbird
Agree…repeal 17th amendment…. That also was in 1913…. Lots of bad stuff… end the Federal Reserve Act too…
Posted on 1/2/26 at 10:53 am to Out da box
I’m seeing calls for amendment repeal, but they could just be added back in later given our current system.
Posted on 1/2/26 at 10:54 am to SlowFlowPro
Sure, but as I’ve mentioned they have shown repeated failure to address these at a state level.
Posted on 1/2/26 at 11:00 am to weagle1999
We have empowered a demographic of proven poor decision-makers to steer the country’s future through sheer numbers. While modern sensibilities reject the idea, the Founders’ decision to restrict voting to property owners was a pragmatic attempt to ensure that only those with demonstrated competence and 'skin in the game' could influence the state.
Posted on 1/2/26 at 11:01 am to weagle1999
Change nothing, enforce everything.
Pretty fricking simple.
Pretty fricking simple.
Posted on 1/2/26 at 11:03 am to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:Of course not. You’d have the haves voting on the rights of the have-nots.
would OUR system qualify as a democracy or as an oligarchy?
It sounds romantic in theory, especially if you currently own land. But unless you were a trust fund baby, you probably had to get a job and borrow money on your first home.
That construct, where someone can move from non-landowner to landowner so easily, only exists because we have voting buy in from everyone.
If not, the landowners would lock you out.
See Apartheid.
This post was edited on 1/2/26 at 11:05 am
Posted on 1/2/26 at 11:03 am to RFK
RFK you sold me end that fricker today
Posted on 1/2/26 at 11:03 am to weagle1999
-new amendment for term limits on congress
-repeal the 16th and 19th amendments
-repeal the 16th and 19th amendments
Posted on 1/2/26 at 11:11 am to SlowFlowPro
we don't have a democracy, never had one, democracy is nothing but mob rule, that is why our founding fathers gave us a Republic. governed by our Constitution, a Connotational Republic.
Get back to what our founding fathers put together.
Get back to what our founding fathers put together.
Posted on 1/2/26 at 11:12 am to weagle1999
Balanced budget requirements before Congress can’t leave session:
This post was edited on 1/2/26 at 11:13 am
Posted on 1/2/26 at 11:20 am to RFK
quote:
You’d have the haves voting on the rights of the have-nots.
And this is worse than the have-nots voting themselves other people’s money which is taken from them by government authorities?
Posted on 1/2/26 at 11:37 am to weagle1999
quote:
Term limits?
Would be a huge help. I often say one of the biggest “errors” our founders made was to not see politics as a potential career rather than service.
These career politicians are a huge part of the failings of our system.
Their other big mistake was assuming people in politics would be ethical.
Posted on 1/2/26 at 11:45 am to dantes69
quote:
we don't have a democracy, never had one
You've never voted?
You've never read about an election decided by voters in America?
quote:
that is why our founding fathers gave us a Republic. governed by our Constitution, a Connotational Republic.
We are a:
Constitutional (A written document creates the limits and procedure of government)
Federal (A national and smaller segments of governing)
Democratic (Citizens are allowed to participate in the governmental process via voting)
Republic (Representatives are chosen, via voting and appointment, to represent citizens)
Posted on 1/2/26 at 11:58 am to SallysHuman
quote:
Repeal direct election of senators
I've never understood why backroom selection was better than direct elections.
Posted on 1/2/26 at 12:00 pm to Narax
quote:
I've never understood why backroom selection was better than direct elections.
State’s interests… I trust that, in my state, moreso than a buncha hangry gimmedats.
Also, the state can hold them better accountable than the individual citizens of the state.
Posted on 1/2/26 at 12:02 pm to SallysHuman
quote:
That’s not what I said, Fred.
I said tightening up elections and whatnot- to better prevent fraud and ensure one man, one vote would be palatable. Even if it happened to somehow disadvantage “our guy”.
But we were talking about what HE said. Not the elections stuff.
Posted on 1/2/26 at 12:03 pm to SallysHuman
quote:
State’s interests… I trust that, in my state, moreso than a buncha hangry gimmedats.
Also, the state can hold them better accountable than the individual citizens of the state.
I remain massively unconvinced that the state party would do anything different than primaries now.
Posted on 1/2/26 at 12:04 pm to Narax
It's certainly one of the less impactful, but somehow super popular talking points in this area. It's like someone came up with it as a major talking point one day b/c it created a difference from the OG constitution and that alone was enough.
Maybe I'm biased b/c I'm from a basket case of corruption that's quite purple.
Maybe I'm biased b/c I'm from a basket case of corruption that's quite purple.
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News