S
He basically does. Language warning. 
Rap music gets a pass in this one instance.
Rap music gets a pass in this one instance.
Hari Sud
Active member
- Messages
- 57
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
American democracy has deep flaws. Here in my short essay, I go over its weaknesses and strengths:
——————
The Deep Flaws in America’s Election Process
America’s election system has significant flaws. Citizens do not directly elect their leader, nor does the leader of the majority in Parliament automatically become president. Instead, the process is indirect, with each state selecting electors who cast votes for the president. In most states, the winner of the popular vote takes all the electors, with only Maine and Nebraska making exceptions. These electors ultimately determine the president. A glaring example of the system’s shortcomings occurred in 2016, when Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by over two million, but Donald Trump secured the presidency through the Electoral College.
Why Is It Like This?
The roots of this system trace back to the drafting of the Constitution after independence in 1776. The representatives from the 13 states who gathered in Philadelphia sought to ensure equal power among states, and the Constitution was written with this principle in mind. As a result, the president is elected not directly by the people, but by 538 electors—known as the Electoral College—who represent their respective states. Most states follow a winner-take-all system, except for Maine and Nebraska, where electoral votes are split.
Voters often struggle to grasp the intricacies of this system, especially the number of electors each state sends to the Electoral College. When the Constitution was written, the U.S. had just 13 states and a population of 2.5 million. Today, the nation has grown to 330 million people, and the number of electors is apportioned by state population. For example, California, the most populous state, has the most electors, while smaller states like Hawaii, Alaska, and Wyoming have fewer.
In the 48 states that use a winner-take-all system, much of the presidential campaign effort is concentrated—creating a strategic focus on just a few key states. The winner takes all, rewards the larger group and it also creates safe and battleground states distinction.
Despite this complicated process, the U.S. has managed to make the system work, which is a credit to its stability. Although court challenges have arisen throughout history, the system endures, and that consistency is worth appreciating.
Checks on Power
Although the president holds significant power, the framers of the Constitution implemented checks and balances. Most financial powers rest with the House of Representatives, where spending must be approved by directly elected representatives. Additionally, the Senate, made up of two representatives from each state, serves as a powerful advisory body to the president. This structure plays a key role in maintaining balance. Overseeing it all is the Supreme Court, which ensures the executive and legislative branches operate within the framework of the Constitution.
The Complexity of American Democracy
To outsiders, American democracy may seem complicated and at times flawed, but it continues to function. However, it has faced significant challenges, such as the events of January 6, 2021, when a mob questioned the peaceful transfer of power. Despite these tests, the system remains resilient.
——————
The Deep Flaws in America’s Election Process
America’s election system has significant flaws. Citizens do not directly elect their leader, nor does the leader of the majority in Parliament automatically become president. Instead, the process is indirect, with each state selecting electors who cast votes for the president. In most states, the winner of the popular vote takes all the electors, with only Maine and Nebraska making exceptions. These electors ultimately determine the president. A glaring example of the system’s shortcomings occurred in 2016, when Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by over two million, but Donald Trump secured the presidency through the Electoral College.
Why Is It Like This?
The roots of this system trace back to the drafting of the Constitution after independence in 1776. The representatives from the 13 states who gathered in Philadelphia sought to ensure equal power among states, and the Constitution was written with this principle in mind. As a result, the president is elected not directly by the people, but by 538 electors—known as the Electoral College—who represent their respective states. Most states follow a winner-take-all system, except for Maine and Nebraska, where electoral votes are split.
Voters often struggle to grasp the intricacies of this system, especially the number of electors each state sends to the Electoral College. When the Constitution was written, the U.S. had just 13 states and a population of 2.5 million. Today, the nation has grown to 330 million people, and the number of electors is apportioned by state population. For example, California, the most populous state, has the most electors, while smaller states like Hawaii, Alaska, and Wyoming have fewer.
In the 48 states that use a winner-take-all system, much of the presidential campaign effort is concentrated—creating a strategic focus on just a few key states. The winner takes all, rewards the larger group and it also creates safe and battleground states distinction.
Despite this complicated process, the U.S. has managed to make the system work, which is a credit to its stability. Although court challenges have arisen throughout history, the system endures, and that consistency is worth appreciating.
Checks on Power
Although the president holds significant power, the framers of the Constitution implemented checks and balances. Most financial powers rest with the House of Representatives, where spending must be approved by directly elected representatives. Additionally, the Senate, made up of two representatives from each state, serves as a powerful advisory body to the president. This structure plays a key role in maintaining balance. Overseeing it all is the Supreme Court, which ensures the executive and legislative branches operate within the framework of the Constitution.
The Complexity of American Democracy
To outsiders, American democracy may seem complicated and at times flawed, but it continues to function. However, it has faced significant challenges, such as the events of January 6, 2021, when a mob questioned the peaceful transfer of power. Despite these tests, the system remains resilient.
- Messages
- 783
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
I think a ground invasion of Iran might be on the cards for the next admin and U.S. "deep state". All the neocons are now coming out of the woodwork formally supporting her (NYT published a piece on a suddenly and very conveniently found piece of evidence implicating Iran in 7th of October attack after months of U.S. admin adamantly denying Iran's involvement as the current admin was and is presumably not willing to expand the conflict). She also said "Iran is the worst enemy of U.S., not Russia or China". She's an empty suit, so she will follow whatever they say. If you guys remember I was saying a while back that an invasion of Iran is imminent; but in the past 6 months several signs pointed to contrary evidence. It's a foolish idea but it has been a persistent one in U.S. strategic thinking. The recent developments in our country might be related.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 783
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Gearıng for Casus Belli, using potential death of U.S. troops maybe?
- Messages
- 2,471
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
This is how US led security order collapses. I don't think they can afford to anchor tens to hundreds of thousands of troops in Iran in 2025.
S
Ehh, it's just THAAD batteries from what I understand. A) Iran's not going to target U.S. troops directly themselves, they use their laughable proxies for that so as to have plausible deniability. B) U.S. troops are unlikely to be hit in this type of role anyway. C) Even if they were, it's not some automatic guarantee of "troops on the ground in Iran, pronto!", that's silly.
Also looks like another assassination attempt today, huh? I do think if the guy wins, someone's probably going to get him at some point during the term. There'll be too many angry autistics completely losing their shit and screeching that the country's literally Nazi Germany, and the plotting will start day 1. Unless the Secret Service gets a total overhaul, it's gonna be some turbulent times.
Also looks like another assassination attempt today, huh? I do think if the guy wins, someone's probably going to get him at some point during the term. There'll be too many angry autistics completely losing their shit and screeching that the country's literally Nazi Germany, and the plotting will start day 1. Unless the Secret Service gets a total overhaul, it's gonna be some turbulent times.
- Messages
- 5,046
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
S
All of these guys & gals are egotistical as fuck, so I buy it.
Also sounds like Tim Cook of Apple called Trump directly, asking him for help getting the EU to stand down with their financial shakedown of the company. That's pretty interesting. I think Kamala's going to win out in this by a hair, but as a gay San Franciscan dude I doubt Cook's exactly a fan of the Donald. Could just be covering his bases, an "in case" type of thing, but thought it was intriguing all the same.
Also sounds like Tim Cook of Apple called Trump directly, asking him for help getting the EU to stand down with their financial shakedown of the company. That's pretty interesting. I think Kamala's going to win out in this by a hair, but as a gay San Franciscan dude I doubt Cook's exactly a fan of the Donald. Could just be covering his bases, an "in case" type of thing, but thought it was intriguing all the same.
- Messages
- 1,422
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Donald becoming the billionaires go-to guy for help when they get scrutinized for shitty corporate practices is really not a good look for him when it comes to courting the average Joe which is what his campaign shtick originally was. Him winning or not is really going to ultimately depend on who people find less tolerable between Trump and Harris.
- Messages
- 4,795
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
I really don't think so.
Yeah, United state simply cannot afford that. Plus Iran is too big, capable and unified for a ground invasion to succeed. With so many drones, ATGMs and home-court advantage they will wage pretty successful guerilla warfare even after conventional heavy formations collapses.
S
Not really. Everyone knows who they're voting for, there's no such thing as an undecided voter in the U.S., and hasn't been since long before Trump. He didn't break that, it was already the case.
It just comes down to who's side is going to get enough of their people's asses up off the couch to vote.
- Messages
- 783
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Yeah my brain says it cannot be, but there are conflicting evidence. The Israel lobby is seeing red, and they have been adamant about forcing U.S. to topple the regime by any means necessary. If you've followed American politics, it's only in the past 3, 4 years the talk of "military option" being on the table has subsided, otherwise in every presidential debate on foreign policy there'd be a question about Iran and they'd always have to say that the "military option" is on the table (and the question's framing always pointed to that direction). The main Israeli think-tank influencing policy on Iran, i.e. The Foundation for Defense of Democracies, has been pushing hard for this war and except the Trump wing (a small part of the Republicans despite the appearances), the rest of Republicans and the neocons are all for it. It's only the Obama faction which doesn't seem to be keen on it and as they have the most influence still among democrats, that's the only force politically which is not on board. If politically enough people are persuaded nobody will listen to the military guys' admonitions about the consequences.
- Messages
- 783
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Don’t Believe the Hype—Biden’s Israel Policy Hasn’t Changed
The decision to let a UN cease-fire resolution pass has been hailed as a dramatic turning point. It isn’t.
www.thenation.com
Excerpt:
"One goal of the “Biden doctrine,” as New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman called it, is to achieve the “global legitimacy” necessary to “take on Iran in a more aggressive manner.” With Hamas out of the picture and a demilitarized Palestinian state under the influence of the Gulf regimes, the thinking goes, the US will have Arab cover in the region to be able to counter Iran—and the cheap drones they’re worried about—and then put all of its energy toward a confrontation with China."
- Messages
- 679
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Would be surprised, if he said that at All ‘cause it was Biden himself who dumped her at Obama and Democrats‘ laps as a vengeance act after they told him clearly “pull off, man. Trump gonna eat you for breakfast”. And totally pulled the plug off on him.
also, I would take any bit of info from NY Post with a warehouse full of salt as it spreads the daily dosage of white supremacy, interracial violence and huge amount of MAGA manure.
- Messages
- 783
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
To add:Don’t Believe the Hype—Biden’s Israel Policy Hasn’t Changed
The decision to let a UN cease-fire resolution pass has been hailed as a dramatic turning point. It isn’t.
Excerpt:
"One goal of the “Biden doctrine,” as New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman called it, is to achieve the “global legitimacy” necessary to “take on Iran in a more aggressive manner.” With Hamas out of the picture and a demilitarized Palestinian state under the influence of the Gulf regimes, the thinking goes, the US will have Arab cover in the region to be able to counter Iran—and the cheap drones they’re worried about—and then put all of its energy toward a confrontation with China."
U.S. added IRGC to the terror list in 2020; EU didn't join them then, but now:
EU holds talks on listing IRGC as terrorist group | The National
Sweden calls on bloc to proscribe group after accusing Iran of recruiting members of criminal gangs to carry out attacks
www.thenationalnews.com
And just a couple of months ago:
Canada lists Iran's Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist entity
Foreign minister warns Canadians in Iran that the decision could lead to reprisals.
www.bbc.com
- Messages
- 679
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
I agree with your conclusion. It’d be costly venture for almost anyone.
However, you run your analysis through logic and conclude that it’s risky.
But you must also keep in mind that logic and reason are most of the time wasted, silenced in favor of interests, personal gains.
there are always some gung ho brain dead hawks to put that option ahead.
In fact, according to John Kirikaou, a former CIA agent, even before Second Gulf War in 2003 (toppling of Saddam), there was a plan (if anyone can call that a plan) to move on to Tehran after they capture Baghdad despite strong objection from military and intelligence community.
Heartbang
Experienced member
- Messages
- 2,568
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
- Messages
- 679
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
First paragraph, I wholeheartedly believe so and support but the second part?!
My God! Who wrote this? Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde
S
Absolutely what should have happened, frankly.
And yeah, Ripley, gotta love all these Democrat-types salivating for some supposed physical confrontation/righteous violence. Like...beyond being immature & dumb, come on guys, between the hipster type dude and the hillbilly, I'm betting on the hillbilly if anything goes down.
- Messages
- 5,046
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
