• @minnow
    link
    1111 days ago

    This may come as a surprise to you, but yes, in a democracy the people are to blame for who gets elected.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      511 days ago

      In a functional democracy, the candidates would run on things people want. Instead, both parties cater to what the elites want.

      The difference between Republicans and Democrats is whether they pay lip service to these policies or not (then Democrats find a way to not pass whatever that policy is, whether it’s with a rotating villain, the parliamentarian, keeping the filibuster, etc).

      • @minnow
        link
        -411 days ago

        No? No. Democracy, functional or not, has no direct determining power on what candidates cater to. What democracy does is select the winning candidate, regardless of who the candidate caters to.

        We may be a flawed democracy with candidates that cater to the elites, but we’re still a democracy and we still pick the winner.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          711 days ago

          If democracy doesn’t work for the majority of people, and your party runs on ‘rescuing’ that same democracy while at the same time villinaising the people that do want to improve the people’s economic conditions, you’re not going to be winning elections.

          If you want to rescue democracy, you need to show that democracy can work for people, it’s the same mistake Weimar Germany made.

          • magic_lobster_party
            link
            fedilink
            -311 days ago

            It’s hard to elect one person that works for the majority of the people. The majority of the people aren’t a homogenous group. Not everybody agrees on which policies are the best.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              811 days ago

              There’s a huge range of policies that poll in the 80-90% range that neither party wants to touch because they upset the donor class.