As I've said before, majoritarianism is a poor technique of argument

[bluestateguy]

For the last 5 years the Right has resorted to this technique of argument called majoritarianism.
Which basically says that if a majority agrees with their position, it must be the correct position, along with a year and a half of childish gloating about the 2004 election. They can't defend their ideas on the merits, so they resort to majoritarianism as a basis for their position. That is a sign of the weakness of their ideas.

Regardless of what the majority believes or how they vote, it's a poor technique of argument. Saying, "well, 63% of Americans disagree with you and agree with me, so you're kind of out of the mainstream," is a poor technique of argument. Am I happy that Bush has a 38% approval rating? Sure, because presidents with low ratings don't get their bills through Congress. But none of that should be used to obscure the substantive point about what Bush has done and not done in office to make him a bad president and a bad man.

[Redstone]

1. Ahem: "majoritarianism" equals democracy.

Problem is, not everyone VOTES.

Redstone

[AuntPatsy]

3. A definate problem yes, but facing us right now is what I believe to

be more of a problem and that is the voting fraud issue not seeming to garner the attention from the voting public that should have raised quite a rucus and yet it seems nothing more than a blip on the screen.

How are people going to push people to get out there and vote if they are unsure if their vote even counts?

[Redstone]

4. How? By telling them that if enough of us vote, the fraud will not be

strong enough to overcome the numbers. That's how.

Redstone

[AuntPatsy]

6. Well I agree with you that regardless of whether or not you believe your

vote counts, you should still get out there and vote but in all seriousness do you believe that it could still not be stolen?

[pooja]

2. nah, nah, ha, ha does piss people off and doesn't

show that you are willing to work with the 4o% that disagree with you... Its a fine line that can be easily tipped...
What Americans are seeing is a govt that isn't working on issues that really affect us and are politicing about flags and gay marriage.. its a waste of time and money.

[nealmhughes]

5. It is not only a weakness of the right's arguments.

Does anyone wish to dispute that DLC positions are not based on any ideology or history, but focus groups?

"Oh, I'm really a liberal -- pretty much a socialist...but my guys say that only Dennis and Bernie can play that game, and they aren't leaving the House..."

Majoritarianism is dangerous. In "democracy" without a solid rights-based iron-clad inviolable Constitution, the majority can easily trample over the rights of the minority. This republic's foundation was founded on theory that sought to maximize minority rights.

Unfortunately, with only 535 in Congress, and 300 Millions in the country, how in touch are they? Perhaps there ought to be 4350 Reps and 1000 senators? Would that really change things? With Alaska getting 20 senators along with NY and California? Probably not, there would just be more "Who the hell is this guy on TV?", "Oh, yeah, he won in 04." or "Isn't he dead?"

The House and Senate could easily overturn every single New Deal and New Society organization if they wanted with a bare majority. Is it likely? Not very, because the aftermath would make the rampages in Seattle and Genoa look like a Methodist Sunday School picnic, followed by a very ticked off new majority...

Unfortunately, it takes 2 to 4 years minimum for the problem to rectify itself, and only then when a new majority is formed in opposition.

Frist and Denny's stranglehold is mind-blowing. It is outrageous. They do not want any open discussion and the only time the opposition will get will be 1 min in morning business or to an empty chamber. Disgusting. Were in the leadership, I would welcome the opposition's comments...but then again I would also be willing to either agree to their points or else successfully counter them. When is the last time any government was willing to do that without a near tie in both houses and a few wild cars to break the ties?