myata

That sums it up pretty well. Look at it this way: in a new challenge, who guaranteed us that we could keep our ways and customs just as they were only maybe tweak them a little et voila, all good and back to sleep again? Did it work for the dinosaurs? Maybe they will have to drop their views and expectations in some way at least as the price of the ticket to the next span. They can certainly think and believe what they like, as anyone can but expecting to divide the governance between these two simple political poles may not be realistic in the new age. When and if the evolution presents us with a challenge can we show to it our wishes and/or conditions? If we don't like the change and to change where do we complain to?

Democracy (for me, us) is a movie theater - or supermarket. If we like it we clap and cheer. And if not, we blame someone/thing else and can do something stupid only to stick it up to - who? Because despite all the great and inspirational words, we have little or nothing to do with it. Only spectators or consumers here, really. Aka, the !diot's prerogative. It erodes, degrades and in the eventuality, can end democracy. So how to bring the responsibility of a citizen for the decisions and ultimately, the state of democracy back in the loop, not in the words but daily, working practice? While obvious solutions can be elusive, it's becoming clear that representative, delegation pattern and practice can be one essential cause of the detachment and alienation of regular citizens from the processes and institutes of democracy. Eventually, the separation engenders the rise of the !diot prerogative with all its known and tested consequences. Can democratic governance be executed by the citizens themselves, avoiding delegation of the privilege and responsibility? That is a question that may very well determine the trajectory of democracies in the next span.

Ah, so Canada...

What is the the legal and/or constitutional grounds for the existence and powers of these bodies? It's a nonsense and a clear aberration in a transparent and responsible democracy.

A hallmark of the binary political system is the isolation of the citizenry from politics to the maximum extent possible. It was supposed to be a good thing when the populace was generally dim and ignorant, to prevent really crazy outbreaks of idiocracy like witch hunts and such. But on the over side of the coin it tends to be extremely opaque and resistant to change. The elites that form ostensibly different political clans, having very little to do with genuine parliamentary democracy have mutual interests and intersperse creating an opaque cloud of self-centered and self-serving pseudo-democratic governments that can be grossly inefficient and in the later stages, anti-democratic. The system is preferred by semi- and about- democracies in the third world due to its opacity and affinity to corruption. In a small number of the first world democracies it's still used it's running into deep and systemic problems or crisis. This is no coincidence as it directly relates to the intent and founding principles of this system.

It will happen and is happening. Outdated political system based on the 17'th century blueprints and made for the society centuries ago cannot serve the needs of a complex and diverse modern society. It will run, that is, will be run into the wall, if not renewed. We have seen how it happens and it will happen here. The writing is on the wall. Political dinosaurs who run it bath and guzzle in it, will do nothing and have no interest in any meaningful change. They won't notice anything all the way to the point of impact and can't even be interested in looking out. To them, all is going exactly as it should. No change is needed, forever. People do not have an unlimited time to act. A party of change, responsible clean government plus a massive overhaul of the outdated and throttling political system. Beginning with fair and accurate representation. That may very well be the last chance to avoid it.

It's still better than revel in looking at own pompous a$$ in a magnifying glass. Democrats do not see the challenges; refuse to take in and understand them. And lost the ability to come up with ideas and deeds that are needed for the society rather than their pompous elites. They may not be and aren't the same you see. Nope: connection lost. They just can't see the difference lost it: Gore, Clinton, Biden. Harris, 2028 let's try again what could be the problem. The eye problem, you see. The cure is hard to come by for that.

Your comment only illustrates the failure of the Democrats and generally, progressive part of America to see and take in the reality. Where it shows and tells you, "one of the greatest challenges and responsibility in history, possibly the ultimate one" you see only "maybe gone but not too far, really". See the distance, the difference? No? Not a chance, even now? Ah the eternal fallacy "bad things can't happen to us". Knock, knock.

Joe's legacy will certainly go in history. A minor uncertainty, "one of the most epic failures of America" or "the last epic failure of America". From the founding fathers to a senile old man who could no longer tell the reality from his fantasies. Such a... trivial trek.

To be fair, Democrats were just given possibly the last chance to do something about it. And look at the finest, dumbest one say without a slightest exaggeration mess. No such easy escapes. It's the whole, entire brain that seems to have gone on fire.

From strange to ridiculous, the use of justice for personal purposes becomes a world-known hallmark of American justice. Does it still retain the meaning? Well, we have to remember that nothing on this planet or in fact, Universe can guarantee that. Words do not and cannot have constant, immutable meanings. We the people (remember?) fill the meanings and importantly, the outcomes. Degradation of justice in America is clear in plain sight. And nothing in it is an unexpected surprise: so many voices over the years have said and warned that out of all bounds partisan and populist games will not end well, will erode and eventually bring down democracy. Democracy is not a wishing well where one can dump any loads of garbage and sh*t curious what could happen. On the deaf ears OK - but even that will only underline and reinforce the evolution's all time rule: he who is deaf to the reality; who will not change and adapt, through carelessness, dumbness or delusion of eternal glory will pay. Well as we can see, no exceptions here. Actually, not even a revelation. Look who's laughing last. Imagine how it will work once a mafia boss is elected the President of the United States of America. What did you say, sorry?

Clarified, you're welcome. Indeed, this is how it works in nature. A democracy that has lost reason and viability will fall. Nothing can stand to the entropy without continuous, persistent thought and effort. Funny that we're rediscovering this obvious truth over and again, in each cycle.

Democrats knew that this was a critical decision point not just for the States but also for the world, and they failed it patently. Nominating Joe was a disaster as it was commented here. Not understanding or pretending, the consequences of this catastrophic choice, the ultimate irresponsibility. Can't be excused by anything. Simply not enough. An inexcusable underachievement that will reverberate through history and can have dire consequences for the world. The postmortem is simple: binary politics has driven both parties to the ultimate loss of responsibility and dereliction of the duty to the people. In their turn, people chose to abandon their duty to democracy being shown an example how it's done. Whoever could claim that there can be an easy way out of here is living in an alternate reality. I honestly see no easy or obvious paths back to normality.

In the face of international thugs like Russia, China Iran and North Korea we should disarm, abandon alliances and go picking daisies in a sunny meadow. Nothing bad can happen, right? Right?!!! Try to find limits and boundaries, to insanity. No seriously, why shouldn't we?

This is what the question came down to. Again. Some two plus millennia after the Rome. Oh well. One thing is clear though, because history says so: can't have it both way. Nope, very simply no way. One has to give, and go.