And to the REPUBLIC for which it stands...

Don't forget, people, that the United States is not a democracy. It is a republic.

Whether that has anything to do with Democrats or Republicans is a different topic.

Pure democracy is a voting anarchy. Some people consider that it's the people of wealth that hold the power. One view says that the United states is an oligarchy: government run by an elite few.
OK, that is, in essence, what a republic (or, to read Wikipedia tell it, any government) eventually becomes. But, really, how many people really REALLY want to be bothered by the day to day operation of *government*? That is indeed why we have a republic. It is a representative government. Believe it or not, it's intended to keep us/help us citizens from not having to deal with gathering together to make decisions about our future... every time a decision is to be made. Do you, dear reader, have time to vote for EVERY decision that is to be made? It's hard enough to get some 25% of eligible voters to make one trip to the voting place, every four years.

Those who complain about "This isn't a democracy" are correct. I doubt they realize what the alternative to the republic actually means. Real, honest to goodness people who are truly interested in things like saving the US from the current administration
seem to be absent the clue of what the other option might be. If there is a valid alternative, I have yet to hear it. Pure democracy works in small batches until people get tired of spending all their time voting and none of their time actually getting. work. done.

The true alternative, at least in the United States, is to actually gather your voting base, learn why you vote this way, and get your candidate elected. In presidential elections, maybe it is time to stop stumping for a *Candidate* and start building a warchest for an ideaset. What I mean by this is to start with focusing on a specific political party that will embrace an ideaset. Then, create amongst that group the candidate that will uphold the ideals of that ideaset.

But, the question becomes... can an independent actually accomplish any of the goals on his/her own? It will seriously depend on the charisma of that candidate to be the great mediator or statesman rather than a simple figurehead/puppet. I believe, seriously, that it will take a new leader of a new party to effectively move from the impasse of what is now. As it stands, I think that may be the only common ground that can be had.

Come to think about it... Here's a bold statement: Let's endeavor to pick a President of parties that do not belong to those associated with Congress. Just once, let's see what separation of powers actually means.