.

Dear Indyvidual,

.

You wrote :

1. « If you want the same rights for all then a Govt should expect the same responsibilities from everyone »
.

Having reread all my posts on this thread, Indyvidual, I don’t see any mention of my “wanting” something. I don’t want anything.

Nor have I mentioned “the same rights for all”. The closest I can find is the phrase “… laws freely defined and accepted …” in my post to Foxy on page 3 of this thread.

As you know, laws are not just limited to rights, they also include obligations, constraints, limits, prohibitions, responsibilities, and punishments.
.

2. « … a Govt should expect the same responsibilities from everyone … »
.

That’s correct, Indyvidual. But, like everything else in this universe, nothing is perfect. Even nature often goes haywire. Responsible means “legally accountable for one's actions”. Mental disorders, alcohol and drugs are the most common factors that inhibit discernment and render people legally irresponsible for their actions. Poverty and utter destitution do not.

According to the National Institute of Mental Health, mental illnesses are common in the United States, affecting tens of millions of people each year. Another 65 million are alcoholics and 50 million are drug addicts.

A surprisingly extraordinary number of Americans appear to be willing to believe almost anything. Political ideologues and religious zealots included.

According to “Findings from the 2024 American Values Survey”, nearly one-third of Americans (31%) agree with the statement that the 2020 election was stolen from Trump. That belief is shared by over 107 million Americans.
.

3. « Working people know that it's impossible to continue as we've been going for the past 50 years »
.

Not just working people, Indyvidual. I think we all agree with that.

.

"The 7 states in question represent only 93 (17%) of the 538 members of the electoral college that elects the president."

No let's get this straight...The US is a flawed democracy because a small number of seats ultimately determine the outcome.

But Australia has marginal seats and a small number of them ultimately determined the outcome. So obviously Australia is a flawed democracy.

And Britain has marginal seats...flawed democracy.
And Germany has marginal seats...flawed democracy.
And Italy....etc etc

You know who doesn't have marginal seats - Russia. All of their electorates vote overwhelmingly for the ruling party. So obviously they aren't a flawed democracy.

Honestly!!

"I'm hoping that Americans will cast aside authoritarianism. That Trump will not get re-elected."

Do you people remember that Trump was previously president? It was is all the papers. And decidedly not authoritarian. But for reasons that make sense only to those beyond reason, this time will be different.

I am constantly amazed at the ability of the MSM to peddle absolute bunkum that otherwise reasonably sane people fall for.

As America's newspaper of record has observed..."Democrats Explain Trump Was Going To Be Hitler During His First Term, But He Forgot".

Honestly!!

Can we compare Trump to Hitler?

Well, he hasn't engaged in the systematized slaughter
of a population or launched an effort to subjugate the world.

"But, as a number of his former top aides have said in
recent weeks, he views the constraints of democracy with
disdain and embraces an approach to power that checks the
boxes of fascism."

And according to his former Chief of Staff, John F. Kelly,
a retired 4-star general, Trump has also offered praise for
the German dictator and the way he managed his military.

There's more at:

http://washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/10/24/trump-kelly-hitler/

I don’t see any mention of my “wanting” something.
Banjo paterson,
It wasn't meant for you personally. The expectations of the general Public is to always point the finger at Govt and, they do "want" more than they're prepared to offer in return.
As Margaret Thatcher so aptly said "The problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples money".

.

Dear mhaze,

.

Thanks for your comment, mhaze. You raise an interesting point about the difference between the US Electoral College and the marginal seats in other electoral systems.

The US Electoral College is unique. It has no equivalent in any of the world’s other democratic countries.

Political parties did not exist when it was created in 1787. The drafters of the Constitution assumed that electors would vote according to their discretion, not the dictates of a state or national party. Today, most electors are bound to vote for their party’s candidate.

The assumption was that each elector’s vote would be counted. Over time, all but two states (Maine and Nebraska) passed laws to give all of their electoral votes to the candidate who won the state’s popular vote, erasing any semblance of individual elector independence.

There is no perfect electoral system, and I understand that the aim of our marginal seat and preferential voting processes is to produce electoral results as faithfully and as clearly and precisely as possible, based on the direct popular vote – which seems to me to be the major difference with the US electoral college system.

But, I don’t pretend to be an expert on such matters, mhaze, so please correct me if I am wrong.

.