Where debating everything under the sun is only the beginning

There's no more democracy in America, the cassete was changed.

One is supposedly so unqualified that the law office he used to work for almost terminated him for incompetence at his performance review and on that review said he lacks basic knowledge of the law. The other is supposedly corrupt. So who to pick

Why in the name of (insert deity) would I answer answer a question that just a snide comment about a typo, as if your grammar and typing are perfect? Let me know when you have something to contribute.

You are not telling us something about your thought-process, Sang…

Define straight!

It seems he did.

I'd intended this thread to be about the recurrent clash between the 1st Amendment right to free speech and "campaign finance reform" — and the contorted reasoning that finds the Citizens United decision an assault on democracy (!).
Perhaps when Sang gets over his hissy-fit he'll return to the topic…

There are many other actions that constitute free speech and freedom of the press. Writing a check is not among them.

The characteristics of a democracy are now present in the US: equality under the law, the right to petition elected officials, human rights and due process of the law, etc. You can also call it a republic on the basis of representative government. That said, a republic doesn't necessarily guarantee the above liberties.

This notion that corporations are people is not popular [; hence, it] will not stand and the precedent of Citizens United eventually will be overturned. Yes, Oakdale it can be, although it will again take the SCOTUS to do it.

[L]iberals [who] treat their positions as if they were free of ideology, [...] can't comprehend why politicians we send to Washington are always uninterested in solving the problems—or, more specifically, the issues he’s identified as critical to our future. After an era of extraordinary action [...] we’re now entering an era of extraordinary inaction.

First of all, two forces slamming into each other is not inaction. But what if people aren’t interested in being governed in such dramatic ways any longer? Maybe Americans are increasingly uncomfortable with the notion of politicians planning so much of their future. Or, at the very least, more voters might have come to the realization that politicians aren’t up to the task. Maybe Obamacare killed for decades the idea of big centralized governance? I find the prospect heartening. A real breakthrough. A plan. Left punditry, though, frames this kind of healthy American skepticism about state power as “cynicism.” And if people lose faith in the decency of hyperactive government, the nation is plunged into “malaise.”

Why not?
Are bumper stickers and front yard signs okay? Billboards? How about newspaper ads and circulars? Radio and TV spots?

Would you accept plebiscitary democracy, as a replacement for our cumbersome system? 

What examples of those characteristics of democracy you listed does history provide?

Hot-button issues (and their propagandists) easily capture an election cycle when government grows beyond the grasp of your Common Man, Sang.

Why must it take a SCOTUS to overturn it? Because the constitution's amendment process is too hard, compared to packing the Supreme Court?

Yes, because those don't amount to paying a politician on the promise of a certain actions or votes on votes on particular issue.

We have it now, at the state level as you know [referring to some states' initiative process, when I asked about "government by plebiscite"…].

Those seem so self-evident that I don't understand why you're asking.

But why trust the legislators any more? They had millions of dollars "donated" to them on the understanding they would act in accordance to the benefactors wishes. Even uncorrupted, they'll just tend to vote the party line and don't have any more understanding of economics or foreign affairs, etc than we do.

Constitutional Amendments should be few and far between. The issue of the day should not wind up in the constitution.

Call it a form of insurance the Founders bought us.

Of course, I cough! I've been smoking for fifty years!
The silliest and nonsensical
tropes are put forward by the most staid
and conservative of people! They fade
into the background, when they are called dull…

Are words best used as weapons or as tools?
(You likely know my preference and my bent;
I'd create and rejoice in the advent
of such a confabulation of fools!)

While it's true, that I don't ask others to
agree with me too much, I don't ask them
to oppose me unreasonably… A-hem!
(What wondrous fiction, I could write! And you

too could — if only there were no human
nature!) What does the Latin mean? Summin?

We'd both prefer that the Bill of Rights trump any temporary majority opinion to the contrary, wouldn't we?

But I don't buy into your "they just vote the party line" and they "don't have any more understanding" BS contention. (Are you talking about Democrats, Libertarians, and RINOs?

Hrmm, politicians set a new record for party line voting (?)

Will you be saddened, if Harry Reid is demoted?
»

(Your country has had bold and persistent leadership too. Or have you forgotten Salazar already?)

Portugal doesn't much matter, on the world stage…

I anticipate the time when America doesn't much matter to anyone else.^* (A third of a continent ought to be enough for anybody, no?    ) I hate to admit it, but Rodney King asked a pertinent question: Can't we all just get along?
Well, we're closer now to being able to than -I think- ever before…

You seem to prefer that a lost world be reclaimed; while others insist that a never before world exists, if only some "magical" formula is pronounced by enough of The People!
I'm happy enough with the people I meet. They're not so bad…