Is America a democracy?

[Thethunderdome]

I voted no, since we're a constitutional republic

[Caninope]

I voted no, since we're a constitutional republic

Which is a form of democracy.

[Odhinnia]

I voted no, since we're a constitutional republic

Which is a form of democracy.

Indirect Democracy..... State Representatives are picked by voting...... but the people actually have no say in what laws are passed, they have to trust their representatives. It's hardly democracy at all, I don't know why they bother calling it indirect democracy.

[Othyl]

The President can't even control his own bowel movements, Congress can and will go over his head if he wants to. The Supreme Court and Congress can tell the President right where he can shove it. If the president vetos a bill, Congress can sill pass it. The only difference is it goes in the history books as the president having objected to it becoming law.

Congress has to really want to pass something to override a veto, it doesn't happen very often. And the degree to which a President can get things done depends on the President. Regan, for instance, coerced a lot of folks into supporting his plans, was shot, but bounced back and turned it to his advantage, the result was a very powerful and effective President. Or you could be like Carter and reign over poor economic times, do nothing to take charge, fail miserably at resolving an international crisis and make speeches that make everyone feel like crap. The result there is a weak, ineffective President.

Indirect Democracy..... State Representatives are picked by voting...... but the people actually have no say in what laws are passed, they have to trust their representatives. It's hardly democracy at all, I don't know why they bother calling it indirect democracy.

Now we're getting into trustee vs. delegate, which isn't quite what the original topic was and varies region to region, individual by individual.

[Platonic Thought]

The USA, in simple terms, is a representative democracy, or, in other words, a republic.

The United States can also be defined as a federation because of our fifty self-governing states and additional territories with some self-government.

I think people try to simplify the notion of what the United States is because we apply a single name to the nation and because of its defined borders. In actuality, the United States is an amorphous entity that cannot be fully defined with a simple term or two.

Sure it can, constitutional federal republic. Simple as that. What exactly those three words mean is where things get tricky. Or even more simply, America is America, don't like it? Well, you could get nuked right quick.

I'm trying to spur people to think rather than jumping to conclusions.

There are a multitude of things that can still be defined, and quite a few are obvious ones. When you have an executive, legislative and judiciary branch balancing power, what do you call that? Also, when you have a "professional" side of the government, such as the CIA, controlling a lot of the nation's policy, that's not very much like a republic. Also, the Federal Reserve controlling the distribution of money is not very much like a republic institution either.

"America is America, don't like it? Well you could get nuked right quick."

Are you trying to say that the word America is my shield against nuclear warfare.

The CIA drives domestic policy? That's news to me, I thought they just had considerable sway in foreign affairs, along with the DoD and State Department, that seems like plenty of diversification. And the Federal Reserve system is probably just fine, we'd have problems with the world existing in anything that resembles how we perceive the world if we didn't have Benjamin Strong at the New York Fed after WWI. There are some institutions where the slow pace of politics makes no sense. Banking and the military are two great examples. Though the Fed is staffed at it's upper levels by Presidential appointments, making it just as 'republican' as any other department of the Executive branch.

I didn't say the CIA controls domestic policy, I said a nation's policy, which includes foreign policy, since a nation's foreign policy is part of a nation's policy.

I'm not going to get dragged into an argument over whether having a secret/semi-secret government as a good or bad thing. I didn't come here to argue about that, just to discuss the topic of the thread.

Fail. The US doesn't control anything but intelligence gathering. They do not control foreign policy. They advise, sure, but the President controls foreign policy. Government fail.

Are you saying something, or just throwing randomness into the conversation?

Replace your use of "US" with "Pentagon", and "Government" with nothing and it makes some sense. I'd still have to disagree though.

[WWII History Geeks]

I voted no, since we're a constitutional republic

Which is a form of democracy.

Indirect Democracy..... State Representatives are picked by voting...... but the people actually have no say in what laws are passed, they have to trust their representatives. It's hardly democracy at all, I don't know why they bother calling it indirect democracy.

*nods* It's sad. They just doll up the actual situation with big, pretty words. Ugh, just like whores...

[Odhinnia]

The President can't even control his own bowel movements, Congress can and will go over his head if he wants to. The Supreme Court and Congress can tell the President right where he can shove it. If the president vetos a bill, Congress can sill pass it. The only difference is it goes in the history books as the president having objected to it becoming law.

Congress has to really want to pass something to override a veto, it doesn't happen very often. And the degree to which a President can get things done depends on the President. Regan, for instance, coerced a lot of folks into supporting his plans, was shot, but bounced back and turned it to his advantage, the result was a very powerful and effective President. Or you could be like Carter and reign over poor economic times, do nothing to take charge, fail miserably at resolving an international crisis and make speeches that make everyone feel like crap. The result there is a weak, ineffective President.

It's happened before. And let's not forget Two Presidents were impeached, although Clinton some how wriggled out of it?

[Odhinnia]

I voted no, since we're a constitutional republic

Which is a form of democracy.

Indirect Democracy..... State Representatives are picked by voting...... but the people actually have no say in what laws are passed, they have to trust their representatives. It's hardly democracy at all, I don't know why they bother calling it indirect democracy.

*nods* It's sad. They just doll up the actual situation with big, pretty words. Ugh, just like whores...

The masses are ignorant..... easily controlled.... they like pretty words to make them think they have some say in their pathetic little lives.

[Othyl]

It's happened before. And let's not forget Two Presidents were impeached, although Clinton some how wriggled out of it?

Yes? Overrides have happened, but they are not the norm. You make it sound as though every veto is overridden, which is far from the truth. The President matters in politics, not to the extent that the general populace likes to imagine, but certainly more than you're getting at.

[Rhodmhire]

The heavy hierarch of the information segment of my god says it's a federal constitutional republic, but hell even if you don't agree with that, the most popular notion is a representative democracy, which isn't nearly what most people would relate to a democracy, or more specified, a direct democracy--apparently the most commonly thought-up thing when confronted with this question.

And America certainly isn't that.

[Caninope]

The USA, in simple terms, is a representative democracy, or, in other words, a republic.

The United States can also be defined as a federation because of our fifty self-governing states and additional territories with some self-government.

I think people try to simplify the notion of what the United States is because we apply a single name to the nation and because of its defined borders. In actuality, the United States is an amorphous entity that cannot be fully defined with a simple term or two.

Sure it can, constitutional federal republic. Simple as that. What exactly those three words mean is where things get tricky. Or even more simply, America is America, don't like it? Well, you could get nuked right quick.

I'm trying to spur people to think rather than jumping to conclusions.

There are a multitude of things that can still be defined, and quite a few are obvious ones. When you have an executive, legislative and judiciary branch balancing power, what do you call that? Also, when you have a "professional" side of the government, such as the CIA, controlling a lot of the nation's policy, that's not very much like a republic. Also, the Federal Reserve controlling the distribution of money is not very much like a republic institution either.

"America is America, don't like it? Well you could get nuked right quick."

Are you trying to say that the word America is my shield against nuclear warfare.

The CIA drives domestic policy? That's news to me, I thought they just had considerable sway in foreign affairs, along with the DoD and State Department, that seems like plenty of diversification. And the Federal Reserve system is probably just fine, we'd have problems with the world existing in anything that resembles how we perceive the world if we didn't have Benjamin Strong at the New York Fed after WWI. There are some institutions where the slow pace of politics makes no sense. Banking and the military are two great examples. Though the Fed is staffed at it's upper levels by Presidential appointments, making it just as 'republican' as any other department of the Executive branch.

I didn't say the CIA controls domestic policy, I said a nation's policy, which includes foreign policy, since a nation's foreign policy is part of a nation's policy.

I'm not going to get dragged into an argument over whether having a secret/semi-secret government as a good or bad thing. I didn't come here to argue about that, just to discuss the topic of the thread.

Fail. The US doesn't control anything but intelligence gathering. They do not control foreign policy. They advise, sure, but the President controls foreign policy. Government fail.

Are you saying something, or just throwing randomness into the conversation?

Replace your use of "US" with "Pentagon", and "Government" with nothing and it makes some sense. I'd still have to disagree though.

It was meant to say CIA...

[Vanzef]

Direct Democracy? no

Representative Democracy? yes

so yes, it is a Democracy.

[Minotzia]

Direct Democracy? no

Representative Democracy? yes

so yes, it is a Democracy.

The USFG operates on constitutional republican principles, the states are more of a representative democracy. On the whole the US is much more of a federal constitutional republic, as power is ultimately given to the federal government, and even most state procedures are based on republican principles, not democratic ones. Democracy is generally a bad idea anyways, because without informed representatives it becomes a mob rule. Minority rights vanish and you end up with a totalitarian state. See Liberia.