7 ms·

Poll: Most Americans feel democracy is in danger and under attack in US

19 points by mardiyah 4y ago

thecrumb 4y ago
Alternate headline... "56% of Americans are dillusional"
- TruthIsHeresy 4y ago
  I wonder what percentage of Americans don’t know how to spell “delusional.”
- FireBeyond 4y ago
  What is delusional? The Supreme Court is set to hear a case that says that states have zero requirement to follow their citizens wishes and that the ruling legislators can cast that states electoral votes any way they want, without any consequence. Minority Republican (or Democrat) Governor in a state that votes (even overwhelmingly) Democrat (or Republican)? Eh, no matter. "My state is giving all our votes to the Republican (or Democrat) candidate in the Electoral College." And the current Supreme Court has all but telegraphed that it will rule in favor of the state, saying that that Governor is perfectly allowed to do so. > The Elections Clause delegates to states the power to regulate federal elections while giving Congress the overriding authority to make or alter such laws. Proponents of the independent state legislature theory — like the gerrymanderers — read the Elections Clause to give state legislators near-exclusive authority to regulate federal elections, prohibiting any other state entity — like state courts or governors — from placing checks and balances on that power. In this case, the gerrymanderers are arguing that the theory licenses them to violate the state constitution when drawing congressional maps and that the state courts do not have the power to stop them. The immediate issue in Moore is whether the state legislators’ extreme partisan gerrymander will stand in North Carolina. But adopting the independent state legislature theory would also mean that voters across the country have no judicial remedy — in state court or in federal court — to fight partisan gerrymandering. The potential consequences could stretch still further. The theory would throw elections into chaos, nullifying hundreds of election rules put in place through ballot initiatives, state constitutions, and administrative regulations — including foundational state policies like the processes for voter registration and mail voting and basic guarantees like the secret ballot. State lawmakers would be able to adopt vote suppression legislation without any checks or balances from state courts or even gubernatorial veto. In other words, the theory would upend key aspects of our elections. The current Supreme Court has also stated, in explicit and specific terms ("erroneous decisions in need of correction"), that if given a case on gay marriage, it will remove that as a right, that if given a case banning birth control in a state, it will allow that, and that basic privacy concerns are null and moot. Tell me more about that delusion.
  - rsj_hn 4y ago
    Isn't this an assumption of the "popular vote compact" that has been enacted in some of the leftist states? They would send their electoral votes to the winner of the nationwide popular vote without regard to what the people in the state voted. The legality of this compact requires that states be able to override the wishes of their population in any given vote and assign electors based on other criteria.
    - Syonyk 4y ago
      "States rights for my pet causes, not for thine!" is one of the remarkably consistent principles one finds in US politics. Annoyingly. We'd be a lot better off if things were put back to the states.
      - nullish_signal 4y ago
        Electoral Votes serve State Sovereignty, as designed. The Electoral Compacts REMOVE states rights, Liberal States disregard their Citizens' Electoral Votes.
        FireBeyond 4y ago
        One of these rulings would state that the state could gerrymander as it liked, and that there is no body that is allowed oversight, no remedies that can be sought. For a "ridiculous" but perfectly legal example in this case, NC could create an electoral district that comprised the governor's home, and his brother's, who lives next door. And say that that is the entirety of the electoral district, and that that district's voting will determine the votes of the Electoral College for that state. Try to spin that as being designed behavior.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
    - FireBeyond 4y ago
      So is the other extreme more palatable to you? That the legislature can gerrymander however it so wishes, and state that there is -zero- avenue of appeal in any setting?
davidork 4y ago
Selecton bias to scare up some last minute votes
legitster 4y ago
The vast majority of Americans are pretty happy with their local set of laws and politicians. How much better would politics be if we collectively focused only on issues that affect our jurisdiction? I sometimes wonder if it would really be that bad to revert to the original system defined in the constitution - vastly increase the number of representatives, and make the senate and presidency appointed positions. It seems like it would undercut a lot of the lowest-common-denominator populist rhetoric.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- notfromhere 4y ago
  Appointing senators didn't work because it became a corrupt office you could purchase. In a world where gerrymandering is scientifically practiced, state-wide federal elections are some of the few where democracy is actually practiced. Reverting senators to being appointed is just removing what few levers of accountability currently exist in the federal system.
  - throw0101c 4y ago
    > In a world where gerrymandering is scientifically practiced […] And the official policy of at least one political party: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REDMAP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REDMAP
- crooked-v 4y ago
  The Senate and the Electoral College are a basic part of the problem here. For example, Los Angeles County alone has a greater population than entire states but gets a fraction of the proportional representation of Rhode Island.
  - anonymouse008 4y ago
    As it should. The problems that affect LA County are vastly different than RI - we should never cater the Federal to local aims. That was the original understanding... the most ubiquitous should be discussed at the federal level, not the mundane. Identity politics made everything ubiquitous to everyone - which ruined the whole lot - now we are eating ourselves from the inside out.
egberts1 4y ago
asveikau 4y ago
In other reporting of this, it was noted that voters of the two parties feel this for different reasons. Republicans think democracy is under threat because Joe Biden allegedly stole the election. Democrats think democracy is under threat because of January 6 and Trump's thing about "fake" electors, or calling the Georgia governor to change vote totals, or that many state candidates for Secretary of State are pledging to enact or repeat the above. So even if most Americans feel "democracy is in danger", each side's proposed solutions would be incompatible with the other.
- lost_tourist 4y ago
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
dr-detroit 4y ago
Grim-444 4y ago
Well, since this is from CNN, how about this fun game: I'll pay $10,000 to anyone that finds me a positive headline about Trump that CNN has ever at any point run. Heck, not even a positive article, how about just a neutral article? An article that just neutrally says facts about some event that happened that involved Trump, without putting spin on it or telling you to think in a negative way about it. The fact that you would be extremely hard-pressed to collect the money says everything you need to know about the state of our "democracy".
- janjanmax 4y ago
  I will pay a $1,000 for CNN video coverage of 250,000,000 Indians protesting the terrible conditions of farmers in India. They were communist mostly fighting for the same things American farmers are fighting and economically struggling with. CNN is propaganda. Hey I wanna make 10k but I will low ball people and still get same result.
- mister_tee 4y ago
  if we're looking "at any point," lots of neutral coverage back in the 90s when cable news was boring, and there was Reform Party Candidate-era Trump. Trump proposes massive one-time tax on the rich https://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/11/09/trump.rich/index.html https://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/11/09/trump.ric...
- drewbug01 4y ago
  Here’s a neutral article, published just hours ago: https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/midterm-election-results-livestream-voting-11-08-2022/h_77890ed375566d9835153344fc815725 https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/midterm-election-resu... (Since it’s part of their live election coverage, you’ll want to search for the headline “ Trump says he voted for DeSantis, predicts "great night" for GOP”) Shall I expect a check, or… idk, Venmo or something?
  - drewbug01 4y ago
    For those who may not want to click, here’s the entire text. It’s short! And neutral: ————— Former President Donald Trump confirmed Tuesday that he voted for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, predicting a "great night" for Republicans. "Yes, I did," Trump told reporters when asked if he cast a ballot for DeSantis outside a polling location in Palm Beach where he voted. "I think we're going to have a very great night and it's exciting," he added. Trump cast his ballot shortly after 11:30 a.m. ET at the Morton and Barbara Mandel Recreation Center in Palm Beach, just minutes away from his Mar-a-Lago estate where he plans to watch election returns this evening with dozens of aides, allies, and local Republicans. He arrived with former first lady Melania Trump and briefly took questions outside after voting indoors. The former president's political future may largely depend on Tuesday's midterm outcomes, as he looks for his handpicked and endorsed candidates in key federal and statewide races to prevail. Major losses for Trump-backed candidates could create obstacles for his 2024 presidential campaign, which Trump is eyeing to announce one week from today. At a rally in Pennsylvania on Saturday, Trump referred to the Florida governor as “Ron DeSanctimonious.”
sn0w_crash 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
sn0w_crash 4y ago
Why was my comment flagged? Many Americans are in fact confused about why adults want to speak to their 6 year old about anal sex. This isn’t flamebait it’s a real topic of discussion for many people. Its even discussed in legislation related articles on HN. Are we to pretend it isn’t?

19 points by mardiyah 4y ago

thecrumb 4y ago

Alternate headline... "56% of Americans are dillusional"

TruthIsHeresy 4y ago
I wonder what percentage of Americans don’t know how to spell “delusional.”
FireBeyond 4y ago
What is delusional? The Supreme Court is set to hear a case that says that states have zero requirement to follow their citizens wishes and that the ruling legislators can cast that states electoral votes any way they want, without any consequence. Minority Republican (or Democrat) Governor in a state that votes (even overwhelmingly) Democrat (or Republican)? Eh, no matter. "My state is giving all our votes to the Republican (or Democrat) candidate in the Electoral College." And the current Supreme Court has all but telegraphed that it will rule in favor of the state, saying that that Governor is perfectly allowed to do so. > The Elections Clause delegates to states the power to regulate federal elections while giving Congress the overriding authority to make or alter such laws. Proponents of the independent state legislature theory — like the gerrymanderers — read the Elections Clause to give state legislators near-exclusive authority to regulate federal elections, prohibiting any other state entity — like state courts or governors — from placing checks and balances on that power. In this case, the gerrymanderers are arguing that the theory licenses them to violate the state constitution when drawing congressional maps and that the state courts do not have the power to stop them. The immediate issue in Moore is whether the state legislators’ extreme partisan gerrymander will stand in North Carolina. But adopting the independent state legislature theory would also mean that voters across the country have no judicial remedy — in state court or in federal court — to fight partisan gerrymandering. The potential consequences could stretch still further. The theory would throw elections into chaos, nullifying hundreds of election rules put in place through ballot initiatives, state constitutions, and administrative regulations — including foundational state policies like the processes for voter registration and mail voting and basic guarantees like the secret ballot. State lawmakers would be able to adopt vote suppression legislation without any checks or balances from state courts or even gubernatorial veto. In other words, the theory would upend key aspects of our elections. The current Supreme Court has also stated, in explicit and specific terms ("erroneous decisions in need of correction"), that if given a case on gay marriage, it will remove that as a right, that if given a case banning birth control in a state, it will allow that, and that basic privacy concerns are null and moot. Tell me more about that delusion.
- rsj_hn 4y ago
  Isn't this an assumption of the "popular vote compact" that has been enacted in some of the leftist states? They would send their electoral votes to the winner of the nationwide popular vote without regard to what the people in the state voted. The legality of this compact requires that states be able to override the wishes of their population in any given vote and assign electors based on other criteria.
  - Syonyk 4y ago
    "States rights for my pet causes, not for thine!" is one of the remarkably consistent principles one finds in US politics. Annoyingly. We'd be a lot better off if things were put back to the states.
    - nullish_signal 4y ago
      Electoral Votes serve State Sovereignty, as designed. The Electoral Compacts REMOVE states rights, Liberal States disregard their Citizens' Electoral Votes.
      - FireBeyond 4y ago
        One of these rulings would state that the state could gerrymander as it liked, and that there is no body that is allowed oversight, no remedies that can be sought. For a "ridiculous" but perfectly legal example in this case, NC could create an electoral district that comprised the governor's home, and his brother's, who lives next door. And say that that is the entirety of the electoral district, and that that district's voting will determine the votes of the Electoral College for that state. Try to spin that as being designed behavior.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
  - FireBeyond 4y ago
    So is the other extreme more palatable to you? That the legislature can gerrymander however it so wishes, and state that there is -zero- avenue of appeal in any setting?

davidork 4y ago

Selecton bias to scare up some last minute votes

legitster 4y ago

The vast majority of Americans are pretty happy with their local set of laws and politicians. How much better would politics be if we collectively focused only on issues that affect our jurisdiction? I sometimes wonder if it would really be that bad to revert to the original system defined in the constitution - vastly increase the number of representatives, and make the senate and presidency appointed positions. It seems like it would undercut a lot of the lowest-common-denominator populist rhetoric.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
notfromhere 4y ago
Appointing senators didn't work because it became a corrupt office you could purchase. In a world where gerrymandering is scientifically practiced, state-wide federal elections are some of the few where democracy is actually practiced. Reverting senators to being appointed is just removing what few levers of accountability currently exist in the federal system.
- throw0101c 4y ago
  > In a world where gerrymandering is scientifically practiced […] And the official policy of at least one political party: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REDMAP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REDMAP
crooked-v 4y ago
The Senate and the Electoral College are a basic part of the problem here. For example, Los Angeles County alone has a greater population than entire states but gets a fraction of the proportional representation of Rhode Island.
- anonymouse008 4y ago
  As it should. The problems that affect LA County are vastly different than RI - we should never cater the Federal to local aims. That was the original understanding... the most ubiquitous should be discussed at the federal level, not the mundane. Identity politics made everything ubiquitous to everyone - which ruined the whole lot - now we are eating ourselves from the inside out.

egberts1 4y ago

asveikau 4y ago

In other reporting of this, it was noted that voters of the two parties feel this for different reasons. Republicans think democracy is under threat because Joe Biden allegedly stole the election. Democrats think democracy is under threat because of January 6 and Trump's thing about "fake" electors, or calling the Georgia governor to change vote totals, or that many state candidates for Secretary of State are pledging to enact or repeat the above. So even if most Americans feel "democracy is in danger", each side's proposed solutions would be incompatible with the other.

lost_tourist 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

dr-detroit 4y ago

Grim-444 4y ago

Well, since this is from CNN, how about this fun game: I'll pay $10,000 to anyone that finds me a positive headline about Trump that CNN has ever at any point run. Heck, not even a positive article, how about just a neutral article? An article that just neutrally says facts about some event that happened that involved Trump, without putting spin on it or telling you to think in a negative way about it. The fact that you would be extremely hard-pressed to collect the money says everything you need to know about the state of our "democracy".

janjanmax 4y ago
I will pay a $1,000 for CNN video coverage of 250,000,000 Indians protesting the terrible conditions of farmers in India. They were communist mostly fighting for the same things American farmers are fighting and economically struggling with. CNN is propaganda. Hey I wanna make 10k but I will low ball people and still get same result.
mister_tee 4y ago
if we're looking "at any point," lots of neutral coverage back in the 90s when cable news was boring, and there was Reform Party Candidate-era Trump. Trump proposes massive one-time tax on the rich https://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/11/09/trump.rich/index.html https://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/11/09/trump.ric...
drewbug01 4y ago
Here’s a neutral article, published just hours ago: https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/midterm-election-results-livestream-voting-11-08-2022/h_77890ed375566d9835153344fc815725 https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/midterm-election-resu... (Since it’s part of their live election coverage, you’ll want to search for the headline “ Trump says he voted for DeSantis, predicts "great night" for GOP”) Shall I expect a check, or… idk, Venmo or something?
- drewbug01 4y ago
  For those who may not want to click, here’s the entire text. It’s short! And neutral: ————— Former President Donald Trump confirmed Tuesday that he voted for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, predicting a "great night" for Republicans. "Yes, I did," Trump told reporters when asked if he cast a ballot for DeSantis outside a polling location in Palm Beach where he voted. "I think we're going to have a very great night and it's exciting," he added. Trump cast his ballot shortly after 11:30 a.m. ET at the Morton and Barbara Mandel Recreation Center in Palm Beach, just minutes away from his Mar-a-Lago estate where he plans to watch election returns this evening with dozens of aides, allies, and local Republicans. He arrived with former first lady Melania Trump and briefly took questions outside after voting indoors. The former president's political future may largely depend on Tuesday's midterm outcomes, as he looks for his handpicked and endorsed candidates in key federal and statewide races to prevail. Major losses for Trump-backed candidates could create obstacles for his 2024 presidential campaign, which Trump is eyeing to announce one week from today. At a rally in Pennsylvania on Saturday, Trump referred to the Florida governor as “Ron DeSanctimonious.”

sn0w_crash 4y ago

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

sn0w_crash 4y ago

Why was my comment flagged? Many Americans are in fact confused about why adults want to speak to their 6 year old about anal sex. This isn’t flamebait it’s a real topic of discussion for many people. Its even discussed in legislation related articles on HN. Are we to pretend it isn’t?