Is a democracy not the "freedom" to make a choice? I've seen dictators make voting compulsory and end up w/a 98% result for the despot. I mean, if you want to be pedantic that's still "rule" by the "people" (under gun point).
Australia encourages democracy while in America..
- Thread starter VicBee
- Start date
Is a democracy not the "freedom" to make a choice? I've seen dictators make voting compulsory and end up w/a 98% result for the despot. I mean, if you want to be pedantic that's still "rule" by the "people" (under gun point).
You can vote blank, but you must vote and Australia is not a dictatorship. In the US you're lucky if you get 2/3 of the electorate to vote.
You think a democracy can't vote itself into a dictatorship? We almost did last election. It doesn't matter if it's 50% or 100%, if the people are uneducated and easily manipulated it matters none.
Besides, you brought up Singapore and asked me why I considered it antidemocratic to strip people of their vote, I don't know of Australia doing the same for abstaining.
Last edited:
You forget that Hitler was voted in... That has been Trump's playbook from the start. People deserve who they vote for. I disagreed and voted with my feet.
In Singapore people are striped of their vote because they don't fulfill their citizen responsibility. They are given their right back if and when they submit a formal request again.
I don't, I precisely allude to those elections. And no, he did not get voted in but the people gave him enough power. The record turnout mattered none.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1930_German_federal_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_1932_German_federal_election
Like I said, he did not get voted in, but his power was.
The Nazi Party’s electoral successes made it difficult to govern Germany without them. Hitler and the Nazis refused to work with other political parties. Hitler demanded to be appointed as chancellor. German President Paul von Hindenburg initially resisted this demand. However, he gave in and appointed Hitler as Chancellor of Germany on January 30, 1933.
Hindenburg appointed Hitler to this position as the result of a political deal. Certain conservative politicians convinced President Hindenburg to make the appointment. They wanted to use the Nazi Party’s popularity for their own purposes. They mistakenly believed that they could control Hitler.
In January 1933, Hitler did not immediately become a dictator. When he became chancellor, Germany’s democratic constitution was still in effect. However, Hitler transformed Germany by manipulating the democratic political system. Hitler and other Nazi leaders used existing laws to destroy German democracy and create a dictatorship.
In August 1934, President Hindenburg died. Hitler proclaimed himself Führer (leader) of Germany. From that point forward, Hitler was the dictator of Germany.
Like Trump would like to.
Biggest crock of shit argument there is. I am a pretty open person and simply follow facts. In most debates there are good arguments on both sides, but one side usually has a bit of a stronger case.
In the voter id debate, the democrats have never made a valid argument.
8 in 10 Americans want voter id laws but the democrats have no interest in implementing it. If you are so pro-democracy, why dont we put it to a vote?
https://news.gallup.com/poll/403052/eight-americans-favor-early-voting-photo-laws.aspx
One restrictive policy that most Americans (79%) are on board with, however, is requiring photo identification to vote.
Study: 46 Out of 47 European Countries Require Photo ID to Vote
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybe...ire-photo-id-to-vote-n2590454#google_vignette
ok...? sure, but this election may have as high a turnout as it did last time and the polling isn't exactly favorable against him. Proving once again that making elections compulsory is just virtue signaling.