And if so, why cant the system produce an anti-war candidate?
2007-12-23 15:52:32 · 26 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The anti-war candidate is Ron Paul. He would recall ALL of our troops from around the world and bring them home. Benjamin Franklin was asked when he came out of Liberty Hall after drafting the Constitution and was asked what kind of government was created, a monarchy or a democracy. He replied a Republic, if you can keep it.
2007-12-23 16:02:47 · answer #1 · answered by Mark 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. I am not anti American I am Pro 100% but the people do not control the government. It is a republic. Everyone would have to vote on everything for it to be a democracy. The states are too independent of one another to be a true democratic government.
2007-12-23 23:57:36 · answer #2 · answered by vleighqnz 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The United States is actually a republic, or a representative democracy. We are not a direct democracy.
And there *are* anti-war candidates.
2007-12-23 23:55:46 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
The US is definitely not a democracy.
If you read all the various documents associated with the founding of this country (declaration of independence, etc.) the word "democracy" is not mentioned anywhere. At that time the word democracy was usually meant to refer to some sort of mob rule.
Andrew Jackson was the first national figure to embrace the term and it is now in vogue. But there is no democracy produced by our government.
2007-12-24 00:08:08 · answer #4 · answered by killintimer 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The United States is a Republic.
2007-12-23 23:57:08 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
I'd like to believe it still is but after the last presidential election I'm not sure anymore!What i'd like to know id why the exit polls were so wrong!
The Dems are afraid to produce an anti-war candidate because all of them are afraid they'll be labeled anti-American for expressing the American peoples desires!
2007-12-23 23:58:26 · answer #6 · answered by honestamerican 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Technically, it's a republic.
You have your choice from among the candidates who run; but there's no guarantee that a person with the views you want will run. If it's that important to you, why don't *you* run for office?
Incidentally, both Kucinich and Paul are clearly anti-war; so even your basic premise is false.
2007-12-24 00:00:07 · answer #7 · answered by dukefenton 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Constitutionally the US is a democracy. However, democracy is the messiest form of government there is and when you have an Executive Branch that ignores the Judicial and Legislative Branch, nothing can ever happen when it comes to the will of the people.
2007-12-23 23:58:54 · answer #8 · answered by Monsieur Rick 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
actually its more of a republic.
there are anti-war candidates, the problem is that there are more issues at hand than just the war, and alot of people vote based on other issues (religion, fiscal policy, etc). especially with the 'conservative right', who have a history of voting for candidates who claim to be christian/republican and are anti-gay marriage (anti-civil rights), and anti-abortion, regardless of their stance on other issues such as the war (except alot of them share this belief since they see it as a christian america fighting a holy war against islam).
2007-12-23 23:57:13 · answer #9 · answered by jamsoftheweek 4 · 4⤊ 0⤋
No, a republic. A direct democracy is essentially mob-rule, where everyone is given the right to vote on everything. We don't do that at all.
2007-12-23 23:55:43 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋