4 ms·

Is the US democratic by any sensible nature? Their president, too, is appointed by electors. Is there any democratic power by your standards? You are moving th

Is the US democratic by any sensible nature? Their president, too, is appointed by electors. Is there any democratic power by your standards? You are moving the goal posts so far I don't think anything fits your narrow definition.

thyristan 1y ago
Switzerland is certainly democratic, because voters can directly vote for laws. Some countries and states do have provisions to that effect, but with more restrictions and less often used. The US is actually more democratic than e.g. Germany, because the president is elected by the people (though indirectly), not by parliament. Therefore a political oligarchy could be prevented, because the majority in parliament and the president can check on each other, and the president is more accountable to the voters than to parliament. Generally there is a sliding scale of course, but the less directly officials are elected, the less democratic a country is. A common example would be a soviet (engl. "council") republic, which isn't considered democratic at all, even though it has tons of elections: Each factory/town/village elects a local workers's council, which in turn elects a county council, which elects a regional council, which elects a state council, which elects a national council, which elects the council of ministers, which elects the chairman. Tons of filters that make absolutely certain that the will of the party and state always supercedes the will of the people.
- josefx 1y ago
  > The US is actually more democratic than e.g. Germany, because the president is elected by the people The German president is mainly a figurehead with limited power. The office was stripped down after WWII. The real power lies with the ministers, who can issue absolute orders that have to be obeyed without question. One of many results is that German prosecutors cannot be trusted with issuing EU wide arrest warrants and had the ability stripped from them the moment it was challenged in court.
  - thyristan 1y ago
    I was comparing the USian president to the German chancellor. Both head up the government made up of ministers they appoint. It's only the name that is different, and the order in protocol. The USian president is first and head of state in protocol order, the German chancellor is third after the German federal president and the president of the Bundestag (one chamber of parliament). Sorry for my being imprecise here, Germans tend to skip their own president(s) because, as you correctly state, they are mostly unimportant figureheads.
andrepd 1y ago
That's just ridiculous. The US president is directly elected by the people, modulo the weirdness of state-level FPTP. Flawed as the electoral college is, there's no comparison whatsoever.
- saubeidl 1y ago
  The electoral college is directly elected, the president is appointed. It is the same level of indirection.
  - andrepd 1y ago
    The electoral college is a rubber stamp of the popular vote (per state). The commission is selected by the member-states governments with no electoral input. You cannot be making this argument in good faith...
    - saubeidl 1y ago
      The member-states governments are elected by popular vote, per state, just as electors are. It is the same level of indirection, whichever way you try to reframe it.
      - thyristan 1y ago
        [flagged]
        saubeidl 1y ago
        It's a big claim to say somebody is spreading lies. I would say it would require at least a bit of evidence.
      - andrepd 1y ago
        There's no way you're seriously making this argument. I don't know what else to say except repeat myself. The US electoral college is an historical artifact that simply rubber stamps the votes of the States. The member states' heads of government make the decision themselves! The equivalent would be the electoral college simply voting for the president themselves. Jesus christ.
geertj 1y ago
> Their president, too, is appointed by electors. While there have been a tiny numbers of faithless electors in the past, they have never influenced the outcome of a presidential election. Furthermore, about 80% of electors are from states that have laws that require their electors to vote for the candidate who wins the state's popular vote.
- saubeidl 1y ago
  Nonetheless, they are who are elected, not the president. The president is then appointed by said electors.

thyristan 1y ago

Switzerland is certainly democratic, because voters can directly vote for laws. Some countries and states do have provisions to that effect, but with more restrictions and less often used. The US is actually more democratic than e.g. Germany, because the president is elected by the people (though indirectly), not by parliament. Therefore a political oligarchy could be prevented, because the majority in parliament and the president can check on each other, and the president is more accountable to the voters than to parliament. Generally there is a sliding scale of course, but the less directly officials are elected, the less democratic a country is. A common example would be a soviet (engl. "council") republic, which isn't considered democratic at all, even though it has tons of elections: Each factory/town/village elects a local workers's council, which in turn elects a county council, which elects a regional council, which elects a state council, which elects a national council, which elects the council of ministers, which elects the chairman. Tons of filters that make absolutely certain that the will of the party and state always supercedes the will of the people.

josefx 1y ago
> The US is actually more democratic than e.g. Germany, because the president is elected by the people The German president is mainly a figurehead with limited power. The office was stripped down after WWII. The real power lies with the ministers, who can issue absolute orders that have to be obeyed without question. One of many results is that German prosecutors cannot be trusted with issuing EU wide arrest warrants and had the ability stripped from them the moment it was challenged in court.
- thyristan 1y ago
  I was comparing the USian president to the German chancellor. Both head up the government made up of ministers they appoint. It's only the name that is different, and the order in protocol. The USian president is first and head of state in protocol order, the German chancellor is third after the German federal president and the president of the Bundestag (one chamber of parliament). Sorry for my being imprecise here, Germans tend to skip their own president(s) because, as you correctly state, they are mostly unimportant figureheads.

andrepd 1y ago

That's just ridiculous. The US president is directly elected by the people, modulo the weirdness of state-level FPTP. Flawed as the electoral college is, there's no comparison whatsoever.

saubeidl 1y ago
The electoral college is directly elected, the president is appointed. It is the same level of indirection.
- andrepd 1y ago
  The electoral college is a rubber stamp of the popular vote (per state). The commission is selected by the member-states governments with no electoral input. You cannot be making this argument in good faith...
  - saubeidl 1y ago
    The member-states governments are elected by popular vote, per state, just as electors are. It is the same level of indirection, whichever way you try to reframe it.
    - thyristan 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - saubeidl 1y ago
        It's a big claim to say somebody is spreading lies. I would say it would require at least a bit of evidence.
    - andrepd 1y ago
      There's no way you're seriously making this argument. I don't know what else to say except repeat myself. The US electoral college is an historical artifact that simply rubber stamps the votes of the States. The member states' heads of government make the decision themselves! The equivalent would be the electoral college simply voting for the president themselves. Jesus christ.

geertj 1y ago

> Their president, too, is appointed by electors. While there have been a tiny numbers of faithless electors in the past, they have never influenced the outcome of a presidential election. Furthermore, about 80% of electors are from states that have laws that require their electors to vote for the candidate who wins the state's popular vote.

saubeidl 1y ago
Nonetheless, they are who are elected, not the president. The president is then appointed by said electors.