[Clubber]

>where the bulk of the power in government should rest

You are thinking federalism vs anti-federalism. That was Jefferson and Hamilton. The federalists won a long time ago, mainly through the interpretation of the commerce clause. Recent decisions by the SCOTUS is pulling back on that a little bit.

>Republicans generally believe direct democracy

Nowhere did I say the US was a direct democracy, I think that's what's tripping everyone up. I'm arguing against when people say the US is a republic and not a democracy. That is incorrect. If they had said direct democracy, I would agree with them. To say the US is a republic and not a democracy when every position of power in government was either elected, or appointed by someone who was elected, is incorrect. The democratic process is obvious.

>Democrats generally believe all power and decision making should come directly from the people, and the systems should be more fluid. They don't see them as guiderails they see them as unnecessary constraints on the people. The people get their say, and their will is done.

I don't see any evidence of this in modern politics. Which democrat has mentioned implementing a direct democracy?

[yucky]

>You are thinking federalism vs anti-federalism.

Nope. At least not exclusively. The party's change over the years but we have essentially always had one party pushing for more direct democracy, and one party pulling against. A rose by any other name is still rose, but the philosophical idea of Republic government vs Democrat government is always there. And it's the key difference in the two parties.

>I don't see any evidence of this in modern politics. Which democrat has mentioned implementing a direct democracy?

The entire State of California is constantly riddled with ballot propositions, which is direct democracy in many case overturning the work done by their own representative legislature. And California is essentially a one party state so there is no one else to share the blame.

Federally, I can't go a week without reading about yet another proposal to eliminate the Electoral College and use a popular vote for President.

So if you're not seeing any evidence of it, where are you looking?

[Clubber]

>The entire State of California is constantly riddled with ballot propositions

Ya, I was thinking federally only. California is its own animal and they do put a lot of things to vote, so you certainly are right with this example.

>Federally, I can't go a week without reading about yet another proposal to eliminate the Electoral College and use a popular vote for President.

That's just people complaining when their candidate doesn't win. If their candidate won the electoral vote but lost the popular vote, they wouldn't let out a peep about it I'll bet. Democrats won't actually remove the electoral college because they use superdelegates to ensure the party can put its thumb on any candidate's scale (see Bernie v Clinton and Bernie v Biden).

>So if you're not seeing any evidence of it, where are you looking?

I'm talking about actual politicians proposing actual legislation and recruiting votes in the senate/house, not just lip service from the stump. They don't do it because it doesn't actually benefit them.

[yucky]

That's not true either though. I can't even count how many Democrats have publicly supported the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact and most blue states have officially passes legislation signing on to it. https://ballotpedia.org/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Com...

[Clubber]

Wow. Thanks for enlightening me. I hope this happens, I don't care for the use of superdelegates to the benefit of the party over the people's will.

[jmfayard]

It will happen the day after Kamala Harris (or another democrat) wins the presidential election despite loosing the popular vote.

Most GOP states will then instantly forget their principled support for the electoral college and join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact to kill it.

We know this because in 2000 the George W. Bush team thought it was (contrary to what happened) likely to win the popular vote but loose in the electoral college, and had prepared a legal fight against this scenario.