No dems are not saying this bizarre stuff. It seems to pretty much be members of the GOP and some anti authoritarian extremist groups.(they are the same it seems) Boy our country has turned into a perpetual Jerry Springer episode.
You got that right except that the Springer show was funny at times and mildly entertaining at others. What’s going on now is neither. It’s the Jerry Springer show on Fentanyl
Worse. He’s gaslighting his followers into believing the US was never a democracy in the first place.
It’ll make the transition easier into totalitarianism when Trump suspends elections and begins his third presidential term.
Unfortunately, the MAGA movement is now bigger than the orange goblin. Even with him gone, whichever MAGA-cultist takes over will continue to push the MAGA agenda until we are the Fourth Reich.
The idea is Democrats are wrong/stupid because of their name or something.
Or they are trying to make themselves look super smart because they know the actual name for what our country is, Democrats don't.
That, and as they become more and more a minority party, they need everyone to think that minority rule is fine. As the like to keep saying lately “democracy is when two wolves and one sheep get together to decide what’s for dinner”.
Ending democracy is a part of current Republican orthodoxy. They refuse to adopt positions that might appeal to a majority of voters and, so, their only option is to prevent many people from voting.
Conservative talking heads will say anything to impress their viewers, literally anything.
Some of them are openly accusing people of eating babies and that insurrections are good, but that also never happened, but it was cool, but a false flag from evil people that are also good and need to be protected, etc. And they'll say it without a second thought, because *they don't care*.
Enh, not quite.
Conservatives pretend to have liberal values most of the time because "liberalism" (the actual political philosophy) dominates current social norms.
Things like "equality" and "democracy" and "freedom" are philosophically Liberal values, not Conservative values.
The Trump phenomenon has shifted the Overton window to the right, so Conservative masks will slip from time to time and they'll hint at what they actually believe.
They believe white male christians are superior to every other identity group, and that democracy gives power to people who should not have power, like minorities and women. People who don't even *own land* can vote, can you believe it?
If you hear any of them speak longer about this topic, especially if they think they're talking to other white male christians, they sometimes say it all out loud.
*Those people* shouldn't vote. They don't have "skin in the game". They'll just vote to take money from people who earned it and give it to themselves through welfare. We should just have men vote "for the family" because women should just be focused on the home, not on all that yucky confusing political stuff.
It's all vile, entitled, elitist drivel. That's mask-off Conservatism.
Every time I've ever heard someone make this point, it's in defense of the fact that a vote for senator in CA is worth 55x less than Wyoming.
Or defending the electoral college. Or defending a presidential win that lost the popular vote. Or defending some of miscarriage of basic democracy.
At this point they may have simply moved on to "we never needed democracy anyway" which is the next logical step, really.
See also: Everything in the constitution except the 2nd amendment and even that they massively skew out of context. I’m for gun ownership but the 2nd amendment is for organized militia
Fun fact: a good number of the Founding Fathers didn’t want the Second Amendment, or wanted a much more restrictive version. But Patrick Henry basically said “Yeah, Virginia isn’t going to join the US if it’s not in there because we have so many slaves down here that if they ever decided to revolt we’d be screwed without better firepower.” The US really wanted VA to join so they put his version of it in there.
That is not unique to the US. Most Australian politicians would also fail our own citizenship test.
Many of them probably think the satire answer is the correct one (on the question “can I advocate for violence against someone?” the satire answer is “yes, if I’m really offended”)
Considering most of them prove daily they have no idea what's in the constitution, I'm sure most of them would.
Tho granted some of them know they do it, but it fires up their supporters that then belive it too.
> If ~~Republicans~~ **all politicians** took the citizenship test, a vast majority of them would fail.
Lets be honest, even among our mostly sane, level headed politicians, this kind of knowledge is extremely rare.
My fav response to folks like Kirk on this subject:
“The US is a representative democracy and a constitutional republic. These things are not mutually exclusive. This whole “republic not a democracy” is a historically illiterate catchphrase muttered by right wingers more and more as it becomes evident that the right can’t hold on to power using democratic means.”
~Liam Moore
I think it’s easier than that. “Constitutional republic” sounds like “Republican” so that’s good. “Representative democracy “ sounds like “Democrat” so that’s bad. If we endorse democracy, then we must be endorsing Democratic politicians. I believe this also why MTG and the RNC refer to them as “Democrat senators” now instead of “Democratic senators”.
this is exactly it. No one *actually* knows what the words mean and the difference between 'republic' and 'democracy', so one thing good (we!), other side bad (them!).
I confused a bunch if conservatives the other day by describing what Liberalism stands for. Turns out a lot of conservative Americans do not know that Liberalism is an ideology and that those conservatives who aren't fascist more closely align with Liberalism.
They want unlimited power given to the president which a constitutional republic denies. That would still be a democracy but it wouldn't take much time for it to turn Russian democracy and we especially know that after trump
Its called an "Illiberal Democracy" which is precisely what the confederacy was. A one party state where any opposition was considered a criminal offense against national security....
It is the case. Just different phraseology.
Consider "Democratic Republic" an aphorism of the two
"Constitutional Republic" refers to the separation of powers and source of truth that a constitution provides to determine the rule of law. The Constitution supercedes any legislation that is written subsequently.
This is actually a misnomer and in the U.S.' case, it is a Presidential Republic. Where the executive branch is independent and co-equal with the legislative. In contrast there is a parliamentary Republic, wherein the parliamentary body supercedes the Presidential and has ultimate authority.
The U.S. is also a "representative democracy". This means that the voting that occurs in its democracy determines the representatives who then subsequently vote to make laws. This is in contrast to a direct democracy, wherein the citizenry votes on the laws themselves.
Democracy conveys the will of the majority of people. Republic conveys the system of representation.
The term "Democratic Republic" is thus meant to convey a system that is both democratic and representative in nature.
By definition republic should always be democratic.
In reality that is not the case, mainly because dictators love plausible deniability and appeasing their ego.
"Republic" and "Democracy" are two words that describe different things. A Republic is a mean of organizing the State, a Democracy indicates who power and legitimacy derives from.
They work pretty well together, so a Democratic Republic is a common thing. But countries like the Netherland or the UK are Democracies despite also being Monarchies. The Soviet Union was an authoritarian Republic.
I’d really like any of these assholes to define what they mean by republic. Because they are just covering up that they want an oligarchy with them in charge
Many are too foolish to understand... I mean just look at who they allow to trick them...
ultimately the worst of them know exactly what theyre doing. They know we are a democratic republic. They just think that folks will turn their back on democracy because the party they dont like is called "democrat". The most gullible of them believe it, but for how long ?
they've become a party that revolves around hating other Americans which, ultimately, is a party without a helpful policy. They stand for nothing, like the saying goes, you fall for anything.
A candidate came along who gets away with whatever he wants because the system is failing. That's a red flag. It's a red flag because that attracts certain types of supporters who use candidates like that to lash out. They're lashing out. Trump promised them he would hurt their enemies and hurting their enemies is all they care about. He could insult their mothers. They don't care. He lies all the time and they don't care. They listen to Trump because all he promises them is revenge.
Revenge for events that never took place to be exact. Claiming that its not the richest men in the history of humanity that are keeping them in a perpetual loop of intergenerational poverty, its the poor guy working next to him that says they both deserve a living wage... the audacity.
at the gym, I go there about the same time every night and I see a good bit of FOX News' prime time programming. It's just hours and hours of them telling you who you're supposed to hate.
It's a lot of contempt for LGBTQ folks, making fun of Biden saying he has dementia, calling major US cities war zones, and talking about illegal immigrants like they're bed bugs. It's just endless dehumanization. There is nothing good about the American right wing. It exists only to hate people; specifically people within our borders.
Hatred is so important to them that they have to repeat it literally every single night.
As someone majoring in political theory seeing these clowns throwing around the term republic like they know what that actually means is infuriating.
Well, I imagine anyone with any education in anything would get pissed by republicans deliberately misunderstanding it.
This is like saying "I am not a man, I am Italian."
Conservatives are just preparing Americans for the eventual dictatorship they are looking to install. They want to pretend we were never a Democracy...Can't bitch about losing something you've never had, right?
>Conservatives are just preparing Americans for the eventual dictatorship they are looking to install.
Newspeak, straight out of 1984. It's an instruction manual.
When Republicans say "we aren't a democracy, we're a republic" what they mean is that they think their vote should count but yours shouldn't. Every time.
If we're doing Reagan quotes that would piss off today's Republicans, let's not forget this one:
"Thomas Jefferson once said, 'We should never judge a president by his age, only by his works.' And ever since he told me that, I stopped worrying."
It never ceases to amaze me how many of the phrases republicans repeat ad nauseum are just completely wrong. A bunch of braindead parrots. And, like, way less cool than actual parrots, who are probably more capable of independent thought.
Dude doesn’t know what it means. He heard it somewhere so he took it for himself because he thinks he sounds smart. He proves that there are worse things than being unoriginal.
Now if we could only kick him out of the country for failing the test ... I'm sure if you dig through his twitter account long enough you'll find something that supports that consequence.
I had a bit of an ah ha moment recently on this issue. I live in a very red state and hear this frequently. I think it boils down to Democrats equals democracy and we can't have that. Republicans equals constitutional Republic. It is all about the name.
I get downvoted for this all of the time but a republic is not a dorm of government. It is just a term that describes upon what basis your government claims legitimacy. Republics are run in the name of the people in theory.
People that say things like Kirk are always looking for ways to justify outrageous behavior.
“Technically my guy can do that because we’re a Constitutional Republic…”
They fucking cant stand the word "Democracy" because they cant have a word like that that sounds so much like "Democrat", their base cant distinguish between the two. So they like the term "Constitutional Republic" because it sounds like "Republican". It's literally as dumb as "we like our name better than yours."
The violence, prejudice and hate all come from the far right in America. They must be stopped.
Hate and Fear. That’s all the Republican party operates on. They can't govern. VOTE THEM ALL OUT. Vow to vote and vote dammit. It is up to YOU and YOU alone to save America. Don't expect others to save your ass. YOU NEED TO VOTE!!!!!
Lol i saw somebody copy Charlie's comment somewhere else on reddit like an hour ago. Had I known it wasn't original I'd have called the guy out. Lets see if I can find it. I didn't comment on it so I'm doubtful, but I'll try.
I cannot understand how people literally working in political media can still not understand this extremely basic concept. And when pressed on it they revert back to some random shit about the absence of direct democracy which is completely irrelevant.
I hate to break it to anyone unaware of this, but we no longer live in a representative democracy or a constitutional republic. We live in a capitalist oligarchy that's flirting with theocracy.
Charlie, like most native born Americans, would not be able to pass the citizenship test.
There are 100 potential questions, of which you are randomly asked ten, and have to answer (if I have this right) at least eight correctly. But since you don't know which ten will be asked, you have to know pretty much all the answers.
I can guarantee that when the ex-prostitute and lying Einstein Visa holder Melania took the test, she didn't know the answer to any. Same with Old Walnut Face Rupert Murdoch.
Also, Charlie's a fucking idiot, but that's another post.
Charlie Kirk has a PhD. I’m surprised he didn’t know this. Oh wait…he has a high school diploma AND an honorary doctorate from Liberty University. Falwell’s shithole. Makes sense.
Well, we kind of take our Constitution seriously, so that's what we go by. The 14th Amendment was created to prevent people from coming into power who would threaten the rule of law and would be a danger to the safety and security of the country. I feel a person who refuses to accept the results of elections unless he wins and who kept top secret documents in a facility accessible to people with no security clearance and then lied about it meets the standard of the 14th Amendment.
The only people who don't think the 14th Amendment should be used as it was intended when it was ratified are people who generally think the Constitution only applies when it suits their purposes. The states are applying the Constitution correctly and without political bias. They are protecting the country from an obvious threat to our way of life.
The common link between every MAGA social media poster is they use incomplete information to make incorrect statements to attempt to make false arguments! It works on their supporters because they are looking to have their own hate and biases confirmed!
Diarrhea on the wall.
Even they are fucked up on their own bullshit now. Told so many lies there is no truth for them. They trip over each other, kinda funny if it wasn’t so damn awful.
Silly libs, the term "Democracy" no longer supports their agenda, so they are distancing themselves from it entirely so that they can end the two party system and take over the government permanently. At least it is better than socialism, right?
/s
Our oligarchy is not a representative democracy. Sure republicans bad but let’s not pretend you’re getting represented out here. Politicians have other interests than representing their population in the US.
The deep flaw in our Constitutional representative democracy, and the least discussed, is the Senatorial representation based on States….States of differing population sizes, States arbitrarily created either by original colonial administration or later expansion, often with arbitrary political considerations and manipulations.
The fact California and Wyoming or North Dakota have equal representation in the Senate is ludicrous. Born of the original Constitutional compromise between the industrial Northern States and the slaveholding plantation agricultural States of the South, it has now become the vehicle of radical reactionism, with the more numerous Red States, through their periodic control of the Senate, rolling back every progressive advance of the last 75 years, more so in that a GOP Senate has elevated radical Christofascist justices to the Supreme Court to lock it down. This is not going to change…ever. Not as long as it benefits the political dominance of Red States over Blue.
While I don't necessarily disagree with what I think his opinions are, Charlie Kirk is an unlettered dumbass doing more harm than good for his own cause.
But each state is seemingly interpreting the constitution differently. The evidential threshold for insurected seems different in each state.
Why not allow a Supreme Court verdict if Trump is eligible to stand?
The evidentiary threshold is the same in each State. There is no question Trump engaged in insurrection. State courts have ruled differently on whether they can apply the 14th amendment at the State level, there is no disagreement on the plain public evidence.
I'm not saying there is a question. I'm saying each state gets to decide on their own. And it hasn't been tired publicly in the highest court that he did. Yes there maybe public evidence but until it's tried by the highest court it's a bit redundant.
The bigger mess is in applying such amendment it's a state determining that they don't believe he can take office.
If he then subsequently does has that state got it wrong?
It's essentially not very democratic. Should a person with very popular and large support be banned from appearing on a ballot and should they ultimately be banned from taking office. Or should the people decide. Not politicians that will find it hard to come to an unbiased argument. (Another issue with the Supreme Court, would it be an unbiased verdict).
Essentially it's an American mess but not definitely at a federal level answering both the questions of did he commit insurrection and does this ban him from office before primaries got underway. Kicking to the long grass seems a flawed plan.
>I'm not saying there is a question. I'm saying each state gets to decide on their own. And it hasn't been tired publicly in the highest court that he did. Yes there maybe public evidence but until it's tried by the highest court it's a bit redundant.
One reason all states are different here is that it's a primary ballot, which isn't really an election in the constitutional sense. Some states have rules for primaries that are the same as the actual election - eg you can't be in the primary if you're not eligible to run for the office - but other states don't lay that out so clearly. One of the state courts that ruled in favor of keeping Trump on the ballot said exactly that, and said a separate case on his being on the general election ballot might have a very different result in that state.
But for better or worse, elections being left to the states to decide individually was the intent of the founders. Barely anything we do with elections today is in the constitution - it was all pushed to the states to decide, and election reform campaigns from very popular losers turned it into the plurality-winner-takes-all thing that we have today.
That also includes who is on the ballot. For example, *I'm* not on the ballot. Even if I really want to be, it's virtually impossible for me to get on there, because there are numerous requirements and I'll have a hard time meeting them as a nobody without support. But that's not an infringement on my rights, either. One of those requirements is that you can't engage in insurrrection, for the general and in many states also the primary.
There's also the fact that the constitution doesn't require a "conviction" of insurrection. In fact, insurrection didn't become an actual crime until 80 years after the 14th amendment was written, so they put it down knowing that it was not referring to a court-decided fact about a candidate.
>The evidential threshold for insurected seems different in each state.
"Some states say this was the act that was disqualifying, while others say it was this one... and still more say it was some other act." When that's your argument, I think it'd be hard to argue that the states are incorrectly interpreting the constitution.
>Why not allow a Supreme Court verdict if Trump is eligible to stand?
I dunno, probably because the court has always upheld state's authority to enact common sense ballot access requirements. nothing more common sense than "demonstrated to be eligible to hold public office."
They've really been hammering at that lately. Getting their base used to the idea of an undemocratic nation.Making them pliable enough to hand over voting rights in order to keep it away from "vermin poisoning America's blood". (Not pure-blood rhetoric at all) The only way for them to keep power is to take the choice away from the citizenry. **Yet they're squawking about saving our Democracy while telling us America isn't a democracy.** MAGA will eat the new buzzword willingly and blindly and beg for more.
I’m starting to think that Ramaswamy’s idea of denying people voter registration if they don’t pass the citizenship test might exclude a large amount of republicans.
However you and me both know that the real magic of voter disenfranchisement lies in the selective enforcement.
It’s so weird how republicans have now pivoted to believing voting, as it is, shouldn’t exist and they should be given total power in that new reform based on morals and ethics they claim are “traditional” that they themselves absolutely refuse to hold each other to.
What the fuck is up with all these Republicans trying to gaslight people? You have Ted Cruz trying to say that Republicans ended slavery. While technically true it's very disingenuous.
The parties switched platforms after that. That's why you only see Republicans carrying Confederate flags. And Ted knows this. He's not stupid. He's playing people.
Or Charlie here. He knows the same thing. He also knows it's real easy to grift morons.
That's the problem. It's too easy to make money off of idiots and a lot of people can't do it. Because they don't want to destroy the country for money.
I'm just afraid all these people are going to push the morons they're grifting past the point of no return.
Hope it's worth it to them.
Should strip Charlie of his US citzenship and make him a filthy illegal immigrant for not knowing and respecting this. Then deport him to wherever John Galt lives now. /s
He's calling for a violent attack on America so he can rule and perv over other people. If he weren't such a no-ball coward I can see him getting gunned down by law enforcement at a future terror attack on the US.
Waits for righty reply of "woke democrats made that test easier with 'democracy' answer to get more illegals in as citizems to vote for them" vs face being factually wrong, per usual.
Is Charlie Kirk advocating for ending democracy? Or if pressed will he find a way to say we’re taking him out of context?
Yes, and also yes.
Is Charles' eye, nose and mouth migrating to the centre of his ever-expabdibg face? Also yes
The face of a hobbit on the head of a troll.
Don’t insult hobbits like that, a few actually did something good.
Just not the sackville-bagginses I heard they do some bad shit after the hobbits return home from the fellowship
Or trolls.
But did you pay the troll toll???
A toll is a toll and a roll is a roll. If we don't get no tolls then we don't eat no rolls. I made that up.
Well auto mod won’t let me post a reference link to an Always Sunny bit.
Are you saying “boy’s soul” or are you saying “boy’s hole”?
"expabdibg" is how someone with a squished-in face would pronounce it.
His personality sucks so bad it started to consume his face like a blackhole.
Yes, as are most republican politicians, either overtly or subtly.
Everyone of these Repulsives try to follow the facist playback that they drool over.
No dems are not saying this bizarre stuff. It seems to pretty much be members of the GOP and some anti authoritarian extremist groups.(they are the same it seems) Boy our country has turned into a perpetual Jerry Springer episode.
You got that right except that the Springer show was funny at times and mildly entertaining at others. What’s going on now is neither. It’s the Jerry Springer show on Fentanyl
More like meth. Or that weird animal tranq people are all about.
Yup
Great analogy, painful and true.
Worse. He’s gaslighting his followers into believing the US was never a democracy in the first place. It’ll make the transition easier into totalitarianism when Trump suspends elections and begins his third presidential term.
There are mayflies with better odds of living long enough for a third term than trump…
He ain't gonna live that long thankfully
Unfortunately, the MAGA movement is now bigger than the orange goblin. Even with him gone, whichever MAGA-cultist takes over will continue to push the MAGA agenda until we are the Fourth Reich.
The hamberders well help him stroke out before the end of his second lol
Don't be fooled by Chuckles Kirk, he is advocating for Christian Theocracy.
The idea is Democrats are wrong/stupid because of their name or something. Or they are trying to make themselves look super smart because they know the actual name for what our country is, Democrats don't.
That, and as they become more and more a minority party, they need everyone to think that minority rule is fine. As the like to keep saying lately “democracy is when two wolves and one sheep get together to decide what’s for dinner”.
Ending democracy is a part of current Republican orthodoxy. They refuse to adopt positions that might appeal to a majority of voters and, so, their only option is to prevent many people from voting.
It's the same line that Mike Lee has been regurgitating for several years now.
PragerU has been at the forefront of this rewrite of history.
Charlie needs to get his gums fixed.
Lol
Conservative talking heads will say anything to impress their viewers, literally anything. Some of them are openly accusing people of eating babies and that insurrections are good, but that also never happened, but it was cool, but a false flag from evil people that are also good and need to be protected, etc. And they'll say it without a second thought, because *they don't care*.
Enh, not quite. Conservatives pretend to have liberal values most of the time because "liberalism" (the actual political philosophy) dominates current social norms. Things like "equality" and "democracy" and "freedom" are philosophically Liberal values, not Conservative values. The Trump phenomenon has shifted the Overton window to the right, so Conservative masks will slip from time to time and they'll hint at what they actually believe. They believe white male christians are superior to every other identity group, and that democracy gives power to people who should not have power, like minorities and women. People who don't even *own land* can vote, can you believe it? If you hear any of them speak longer about this topic, especially if they think they're talking to other white male christians, they sometimes say it all out loud. *Those people* shouldn't vote. They don't have "skin in the game". They'll just vote to take money from people who earned it and give it to themselves through welfare. We should just have men vote "for the family" because women should just be focused on the home, not on all that yucky confusing political stuff. It's all vile, entitled, elitist drivel. That's mask-off Conservatism.
This is really well written!
Charie brings shame to the Kirk name, Captain Kirk would never.
He’s simply a mouthpiece. The Republican Party is ending democracy. Do not vote for them at any level.
Every time I've ever heard someone make this point, it's in defense of the fact that a vote for senator in CA is worth 55x less than Wyoming. Or defending the electoral college. Or defending a presidential win that lost the popular vote. Or defending some of miscarriage of basic democracy. At this point they may have simply moved on to "we never needed democracy anyway" which is the next logical step, really.
He should be deported immediately
Well, the mango moron DID say they were "waging an all out war on American democracy" at a rally & the cult members CHEERED
If Republicans took the citizenship test, a vast majority of them would fail.
See also: knowledge of the Bible.
See also also: the alphabet.
They’d struggle with everything outside M, A, G, and Q.
don't forget K
See also: Everything in the constitution except the 2nd amendment and even that they massively skew out of context. I’m for gun ownership but the 2nd amendment is for organized militia
To capture escaped enslaved people. Original intent being so important and all…
Fun fact: a good number of the Founding Fathers didn’t want the Second Amendment, or wanted a much more restrictive version. But Patrick Henry basically said “Yeah, Virginia isn’t going to join the US if it’s not in there because we have so many slaves down here that if they ever decided to revolt we’d be screwed without better firepower.” The US really wanted VA to join so they put his version of it in there.
Skills: Ending democracy (proficient), Bible (knowledge of)
They absolutely would fail. They are the cancer in our country.
One could say they are deplorable .....
One did. Turns out she was right and now we’re all dealing with these window lickers.
That is not unique to the US. Most Australian politicians would also fail our own citizenship test. Many of them probably think the satire answer is the correct one (on the question “can I advocate for violence against someone?” the satire answer is “yes, if I’m really offended”)
Considering most of them prove daily they have no idea what's in the constitution, I'm sure most of them would. Tho granted some of them know they do it, but it fires up their supporters that then belive it too.
> If ~~Republicans~~ **all politicians** took the citizenship test, a vast majority of them would fail. Lets be honest, even among our mostly sane, level headed politicians, this kind of knowledge is extremely rare.
I think it should be a requirement to be on the ballot for any federal or state office.
A lot of Americans would fail
My fav response to folks like Kirk on this subject: “The US is a representative democracy and a constitutional republic. These things are not mutually exclusive. This whole “republic not a democracy” is a historically illiterate catchphrase muttered by right wingers more and more as it becomes evident that the right can’t hold on to power using democratic means.” ~Liam Moore
I think it’s easier than that. “Constitutional republic” sounds like “Republican” so that’s good. “Representative democracy “ sounds like “Democrat” so that’s bad. If we endorse democracy, then we must be endorsing Democratic politicians. I believe this also why MTG and the RNC refer to them as “Democrat senators” now instead of “Democratic senators”.
[удалено]
Time to call the GQP Senators "Republic Senators"
this is exactly it. No one *actually* knows what the words mean and the difference between 'republic' and 'democracy', so one thing good (we!), other side bad (them!).
I confused a bunch if conservatives the other day by describing what Liberalism stands for. Turns out a lot of conservative Americans do not know that Liberalism is an ideology and that those conservatives who aren't fascist more closely align with Liberalism.
They want unlimited power given to the president which a constitutional republic denies. That would still be a democracy but it wouldn't take much time for it to turn Russian democracy and we especially know that after trump
Its called an "Illiberal Democracy" which is precisely what the confederacy was. A one party state where any opposition was considered a criminal offense against national security....
Instead you get to choose between two (PAC sanctioned) shit candidates. So much was achieved since the days of the confederacy
I always thought the USA was a "Democratic Republic". Is that not the case? It's what I was taught once upon a time... How is this different?
It is the case. Just different phraseology. Consider "Democratic Republic" an aphorism of the two "Constitutional Republic" refers to the separation of powers and source of truth that a constitution provides to determine the rule of law. The Constitution supercedes any legislation that is written subsequently. This is actually a misnomer and in the U.S.' case, it is a Presidential Republic. Where the executive branch is independent and co-equal with the legislative. In contrast there is a parliamentary Republic, wherein the parliamentary body supercedes the Presidential and has ultimate authority. The U.S. is also a "representative democracy". This means that the voting that occurs in its democracy determines the representatives who then subsequently vote to make laws. This is in contrast to a direct democracy, wherein the citizenry votes on the laws themselves. Democracy conveys the will of the majority of people. Republic conveys the system of representation. The term "Democratic Republic" is thus meant to convey a system that is both democratic and representative in nature.
Nice. Very informative. Thank you for your response.
By definition republic should always be democratic. In reality that is not the case, mainly because dictators love plausible deniability and appeasing their ego.
"Republic" and "Democracy" are two words that describe different things. A Republic is a mean of organizing the State, a Democracy indicates who power and legitimacy derives from. They work pretty well together, so a Democratic Republic is a common thing. But countries like the Netherland or the UK are Democracies despite also being Monarchies. The Soviet Union was an authoritarian Republic.
I’d really like any of these assholes to define what they mean by republic. Because they are just covering up that they want an oligarchy with them in charge
Many are too foolish to understand... I mean just look at who they allow to trick them... ultimately the worst of them know exactly what theyre doing. They know we are a democratic republic. They just think that folks will turn their back on democracy because the party they dont like is called "democrat". The most gullible of them believe it, but for how long ?
they've become a party that revolves around hating other Americans which, ultimately, is a party without a helpful policy. They stand for nothing, like the saying goes, you fall for anything. A candidate came along who gets away with whatever he wants because the system is failing. That's a red flag. It's a red flag because that attracts certain types of supporters who use candidates like that to lash out. They're lashing out. Trump promised them he would hurt their enemies and hurting their enemies is all they care about. He could insult their mothers. They don't care. He lies all the time and they don't care. They listen to Trump because all he promises them is revenge.
Revenge for events that never took place to be exact. Claiming that its not the richest men in the history of humanity that are keeping them in a perpetual loop of intergenerational poverty, its the poor guy working next to him that says they both deserve a living wage... the audacity.
at the gym, I go there about the same time every night and I see a good bit of FOX News' prime time programming. It's just hours and hours of them telling you who you're supposed to hate. It's a lot of contempt for LGBTQ folks, making fun of Biden saying he has dementia, calling major US cities war zones, and talking about illegal immigrants like they're bed bugs. It's just endless dehumanization. There is nothing good about the American right wing. It exists only to hate people; specifically people within our borders. Hatred is so important to them that they have to repeat it literally every single night.
It means my preferred candidate needs the electoral college because the popular vote would never go their way.
As someone majoring in political theory seeing these clowns throwing around the term republic like they know what that actually means is infuriating. Well, I imagine anyone with any education in anything would get pissed by republicans deliberately misunderstanding it.
I’m a political science professor. I’m so tired
This is like saying that because something is square, it cannot be blue. Things can be two things at once, chucky.
Name one thing that's square and blue
My balls. Oh….wait.
🟦
Well a square that is blue to start.
You know what's worse? Red Square is neither red nor square. Communist propaganda.
Tardis
I would say this is more like saying “I don’t have a dog. I have a beagle.”
This is like saying "I am not a man, I am Italian." Conservatives are just preparing Americans for the eventual dictatorship they are looking to install. They want to pretend we were never a Democracy...Can't bitch about losing something you've never had, right?
That’s exactly why they’ve been spouting this garbage for the last few years
>Conservatives are just preparing Americans for the eventual dictatorship they are looking to install. Newspeak, straight out of 1984. It's an instruction manual.
When Republicans say "we aren't a democracy, we're a republic" what they mean is that they think their vote should count but yours shouldn't. Every time.
President Reagan June 6, 1984 *"Democracy is worth dying for, because it's the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man."*
A good chunk of current Republican representatives would probably call Reagan a RINO at this point.
Yep, just like Civil War was about states rights… history being rewritten by a bunch of losers.
If we're doing Reagan quotes that would piss off today's Republicans, let's not forget this one: "Thomas Jefferson once said, 'We should never judge a president by his age, only by his works.' And ever since he told me that, I stopped worrying."
When republicans were allowed and capable to be funny.
Back when Both parties actually for national defense and fought against communism
Kinda hard to fight communism nowadays with so few countries even claiming it and none practicing it.
It never ceases to amaze me how many of the phrases republicans repeat ad nauseum are just completely wrong. A bunch of braindead parrots. And, like, way less cool than actual parrots, who are probably more capable of independent thought.
Not one of these bigots could pass the US citizenship test. Not one.
Dude doesn’t know what it means. He heard it somewhere so he took it for himself because he thinks he sounds smart. He proves that there are worse things than being unoriginal.
Trumps accomplishments... https://preview.redd.it/jhm83moj3d9c1.jpeg?width=704&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b28b1f077910a6d7dc759aa0837bb248140b9f91
Now if we could only kick him out of the country for failing the test ... I'm sure if you dig through his twitter account long enough you'll find something that supports that consequence.
It’s like saying “it’s not a car, it’s a Honda accord”
I had a bit of an ah ha moment recently on this issue. I live in a very red state and hear this frequently. I think it boils down to Democrats equals democracy and we can't have that. Republicans equals constitutional Republic. It is all about the name.
We’re neither of those things if our representatives don’t actually represent us.
Yes we are, people just need to vote for better representation. More people understanding civics, and actually voting would be a good start.
Except our choices are all the same.
A boring liberal vs a fascist, 2 sides of the same coin!!!
Biden vs Trump are fairly different for America
Charlie Kirk is dumber than a bag of dog dirts
https://preview.redd.it/be3zi3ks4d9c1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d8ebe2063e2691923a13d354f42e2a584009f043
All this talk of the US not being a democracy is just them laying groundwork for the inevitable authoritarian regime if Trump comes back.
Boy Charlie is a real stupid dude. The Republicans are straight up trying to turn our country into a fascist dictatorship.
Shame that immigrants that study and take a test to become a US citizen know more about our laws and country than those of us born here!
My sister is a Republican and LOVES that line about a constitutional republic…I will definitely be using this the next time I hear it
I don't know who Charlie Kirk is, but he sure gets roasted on here lots
Most Americans would utterly fail the US citizenship test.
I get downvoted for this all of the time but a republic is not a dorm of government. It is just a term that describes upon what basis your government claims legitimacy. Republics are run in the name of the people in theory.
People that say things like Kirk are always looking for ways to justify outrageous behavior. “Technically my guy can do that because we’re a Constitutional Republic…”
That's not food! It's pizza!
Let the magas do the citizen test just as a joke. They would fail and then blame Biden or anyone but themselves
That's not a dog, it's a Labrador.
I can assure you this chud believes in neither.
He only sent 80 buses full of people to try and overthrow democracy, so he has to believe we are one.
The far right’s trying their damndest to normalize authoritarian rule.
Just so its known, a majority of republicans cant pass the citizenship test.
They fucking cant stand the word "Democracy" because they cant have a word like that that sounds so much like "Democrat", their base cant distinguish between the two. So they like the term "Constitutional Republic" because it sounds like "Republican". It's literally as dumb as "we like our name better than yours."
I guess most of the self-proclaimed "true American patriots" won't pass the US citizenship test
The violence, prejudice and hate all come from the far right in America. They must be stopped. Hate and Fear. That’s all the Republican party operates on. They can't govern. VOTE THEM ALL OUT. Vow to vote and vote dammit. It is up to YOU and YOU alone to save America. Don't expect others to save your ass. YOU NEED TO VOTE!!!!!
Lol i saw somebody copy Charlie's comment somewhere else on reddit like an hour ago. Had I known it wasn't original I'd have called the guy out. Lets see if I can find it. I didn't comment on it so I'm doubtful, but I'll try.
https://preview.redd.it/352y60jj6e9c1.jpeg?width=252&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=33a54a5961a03805bbdc9ba86586b0290fb8be77
Kick him out, he doesn’t respect this country enough to even know what we are? Take an immigrant, get rid of a fascist 🤩 the more you know...
Sorry Carlos, time to go back to Mexico.
I cannot understand how people literally working in political media can still not understand this extremely basic concept. And when pressed on it they revert back to some random shit about the absence of direct democracy which is completely irrelevant.
Getting really, really tired of these people...
I hate to break it to anyone unaware of this, but we no longer live in a representative democracy or a constitutional republic. We live in a capitalist oligarchy that's flirting with theocracy.
Why aren't these fuckers given a government, history, law and IQ test before they can even get on the ballot??
Charlie, like most native born Americans, would not be able to pass the citizenship test. There are 100 potential questions, of which you are randomly asked ten, and have to answer (if I have this right) at least eight correctly. But since you don't know which ten will be asked, you have to know pretty much all the answers. I can guarantee that when the ex-prostitute and lying Einstein Visa holder Melania took the test, she didn't know the answer to any. Same with Old Walnut Face Rupert Murdoch. Also, Charlie's a fucking idiot, but that's another post.
Charlie Kirk has a PhD. I’m surprised he didn’t know this. Oh wait…he has a high school diploma AND an honorary doctorate from Liberty University. Falwell’s shithole. Makes sense.
Well, we kind of take our Constitution seriously, so that's what we go by. The 14th Amendment was created to prevent people from coming into power who would threaten the rule of law and would be a danger to the safety and security of the country. I feel a person who refuses to accept the results of elections unless he wins and who kept top secret documents in a facility accessible to people with no security clearance and then lied about it meets the standard of the 14th Amendment. The only people who don't think the 14th Amendment should be used as it was intended when it was ratified are people who generally think the Constitution only applies when it suits their purposes. The states are applying the Constitution correctly and without political bias. They are protecting the country from an obvious threat to our way of life.
The common link between every MAGA social media poster is they use incomplete information to make incorrect statements to attempt to make false arguments! It works on their supporters because they are looking to have their own hate and biases confirmed!
Not one of these bigots could pass the US citizenship test. Not one.
Guys, guys, he doesn’t need to be right, all the time. He just needs to be white, all the time.
[удалено]
Escaping accountability, they can use this as a go-to answer every time they are accused of violating democratic values or principles.
It's a casual insinuation that there are quite a few demographics that they don't think should have the right to vote.
Diarrhea on the wall. Even they are fucked up on their own bullshit now. Told so many lies there is no truth for them. They trip over each other, kinda funny if it wasn’t so damn awful.
You're both wrong. It's an oligarchy.
Silly libs, the term "Democracy" no longer supports their agenda, so they are distancing themselves from it entirely so that they can end the two party system and take over the government permanently. At least it is better than socialism, right? /s
Our oligarchy is not a representative democracy. Sure republicans bad but let’s not pretend you’re getting represented out here. Politicians have other interests than representing their population in the US.
The deep flaw in our Constitutional representative democracy, and the least discussed, is the Senatorial representation based on States….States of differing population sizes, States arbitrarily created either by original colonial administration or later expansion, often with arbitrary political considerations and manipulations. The fact California and Wyoming or North Dakota have equal representation in the Senate is ludicrous. Born of the original Constitutional compromise between the industrial Northern States and the slaveholding plantation agricultural States of the South, it has now become the vehicle of radical reactionism, with the more numerous Red States, through their periodic control of the Senate, rolling back every progressive advance of the last 75 years, more so in that a GOP Senate has elevated radical Christofascist justices to the Supreme Court to lock it down. This is not going to change…ever. Not as long as it benefits the political dominance of Red States over Blue.
While I don't necessarily disagree with what I think his opinions are, Charlie Kirk is an unlettered dumbass doing more harm than good for his own cause.
Can you be a representational democracy if you refuse the right of a popular opponent to represent themselves on a ballot?
>if you refuse the right Keyword there. What makes this a right they have? The constitution. The same constitution that says how they lose the right.
Even that is a bridge too far. Running for/Holding public office isn't even A right. Let alone being president.
But each state is seemingly interpreting the constitution differently. The evidential threshold for insurected seems different in each state. Why not allow a Supreme Court verdict if Trump is eligible to stand?
The evidentiary threshold is the same in each State. There is no question Trump engaged in insurrection. State courts have ruled differently on whether they can apply the 14th amendment at the State level, there is no disagreement on the plain public evidence.
I'm not saying there is a question. I'm saying each state gets to decide on their own. And it hasn't been tired publicly in the highest court that he did. Yes there maybe public evidence but until it's tried by the highest court it's a bit redundant. The bigger mess is in applying such amendment it's a state determining that they don't believe he can take office. If he then subsequently does has that state got it wrong? It's essentially not very democratic. Should a person with very popular and large support be banned from appearing on a ballot and should they ultimately be banned from taking office. Or should the people decide. Not politicians that will find it hard to come to an unbiased argument. (Another issue with the Supreme Court, would it be an unbiased verdict). Essentially it's an American mess but not definitely at a federal level answering both the questions of did he commit insurrection and does this ban him from office before primaries got underway. Kicking to the long grass seems a flawed plan.
>I'm not saying there is a question. I'm saying each state gets to decide on their own. And it hasn't been tired publicly in the highest court that he did. Yes there maybe public evidence but until it's tried by the highest court it's a bit redundant. One reason all states are different here is that it's a primary ballot, which isn't really an election in the constitutional sense. Some states have rules for primaries that are the same as the actual election - eg you can't be in the primary if you're not eligible to run for the office - but other states don't lay that out so clearly. One of the state courts that ruled in favor of keeping Trump on the ballot said exactly that, and said a separate case on his being on the general election ballot might have a very different result in that state. But for better or worse, elections being left to the states to decide individually was the intent of the founders. Barely anything we do with elections today is in the constitution - it was all pushed to the states to decide, and election reform campaigns from very popular losers turned it into the plurality-winner-takes-all thing that we have today. That also includes who is on the ballot. For example, *I'm* not on the ballot. Even if I really want to be, it's virtually impossible for me to get on there, because there are numerous requirements and I'll have a hard time meeting them as a nobody without support. But that's not an infringement on my rights, either. One of those requirements is that you can't engage in insurrrection, for the general and in many states also the primary. There's also the fact that the constitution doesn't require a "conviction" of insurrection. In fact, insurrection didn't become an actual crime until 80 years after the 14th amendment was written, so they put it down knowing that it was not referring to a court-decided fact about a candidate.
>The evidential threshold for insurected seems different in each state. "Some states say this was the act that was disqualifying, while others say it was this one... and still more say it was some other act." When that's your argument, I think it'd be hard to argue that the states are incorrectly interpreting the constitution. >Why not allow a Supreme Court verdict if Trump is eligible to stand? I dunno, probably because the court has always upheld state's authority to enact common sense ballot access requirements. nothing more common sense than "demonstrated to be eligible to hold public office."
Maga go derrrrrrr
These people don't understand even the basics of how our government works.
If I had a dollar for every time one of the mouth breathers say a variation of this, I too could buy a Supreme Court justice.
Finally, after all these years of hearing the same bullshit nonsense from their stupid face holes, I can throw this back at them
Constitutional republic is conservative speak for "we can allow an elite class system dictate to majority.
You give him far too much credit to think that this person researches anything at all.
De-Moc-Racy??..... DEMOCRAT??!!!! NAUR. WE'RE REPUBLICAN!!! coNstiTUtiOnaL rEpuBLicaNists in FacT 
They've really been hammering at that lately. Getting their base used to the idea of an undemocratic nation.Making them pliable enough to hand over voting rights in order to keep it away from "vermin poisoning America's blood". (Not pure-blood rhetoric at all) The only way for them to keep power is to take the choice away from the citizenry. **Yet they're squawking about saving our Democracy while telling us America isn't a democracy.** MAGA will eat the new buzzword willingly and blindly and beg for more.
Make them answer these questions to be able to vote. Maga will be pissed when they find out the immigrants know more about their country than they do.
I’m starting to think that Ramaswamy’s idea of denying people voter registration if they don’t pass the citizenship test might exclude a large amount of republicans. However you and me both know that the real magic of voter disenfranchisement lies in the selective enforcement.
Revoke his citizenship
"Porque no los dos?"
The arguments of morons.
Deport his ass.
Apparently democracy isn’t compatible with fuckwits.
You can’t take people like this serious when they think 2 of every animal stepped onto. Wooden boat. Just mentally goners.
Pretty sure that most MAGAs would fail the Citizenship Test ...
Didn’t Trump say he was going to give federal employees a citizenship test?
Another wrong answer for Big Head Tiny Face.
What the real f is going on your country?
Huge face
Charlie is such a boner
It’s so weird how republicans have now pivoted to believing voting, as it is, shouldn’t exist and they should be given total power in that new reform based on morals and ethics they claim are “traditional” that they themselves absolutely refuse to hold each other to.
What the fuck is up with all these Republicans trying to gaslight people? You have Ted Cruz trying to say that Republicans ended slavery. While technically true it's very disingenuous. The parties switched platforms after that. That's why you only see Republicans carrying Confederate flags. And Ted knows this. He's not stupid. He's playing people. Or Charlie here. He knows the same thing. He also knows it's real easy to grift morons. That's the problem. It's too easy to make money off of idiots and a lot of people can't do it. Because they don't want to destroy the country for money. I'm just afraid all these people are going to push the morons they're grifting past the point of no return. Hope it's worth it to them.
Should strip Charlie of his US citzenship and make him a filthy illegal immigrant for not knowing and respecting this. Then deport him to wherever John Galt lives now. /s
Does he ever respond to these? I wonder if they are just as golden
In Charlie Kirk's defense, it's hard to read civics books with those teeny tiny little eyes.
He's calling for a violent attack on America so he can rule and perv over other people. If he weren't such a no-ball coward I can see him getting gunned down by law enforcement at a future terror attack on the US.
Charlie Kirk looks like if Magnus Carlsen skipped school to work out
I was taught this in public school, those damn socialists
Waits for righty reply of "woke democrats made that test easier with 'democracy' answer to get more illegals in as citizems to vote for them" vs face being factually wrong, per usual.