Is this right?


Regarding Trump’s bullshit about potentially not accepting the result of the forthcoming election:

“In 1800, Federalist president John Adams lost to Thomas Jefferson and his Democratic-Republicans, following a painful and contentious contest. And rather than fight or challenge the results, Adams handed his rival the reins of power, the first peaceful transition of power in a democracy and a milestone in the history of the modern world.”

That doesn’t sound right.


It doesn’t sound right


I thought it was an allusion to how American democracy always requires co-operation from the two parties in congress or it all grinds to a halt and that now the parties are probably further away ideologically than ever it’s time to forget those old ways
Maybe he just hates … er actually I’m going with “yes”.


But, other countries were using elections to democratically choose representatives before 1800, right? And the losing sides typically accepted those results. Surely?


depends on your definition of democracy. If you define the British late C18th constitution as democratic, then no its not. Clearly though the American system was more democratic than that. Don’t know if there had been previous “transitions of power” to this in America though. Perhaps the same party won all the elections from independence to 1800.


The UK was on its 17th prime minister by 1800. I know the franchise was far smaller, but still.


Yeah, but I mean it was always just rich landowners who basically bickered over details at that point yeah? Oh I don’t know.


maybe to do with it being the head of state being elected or something?


yeah but was it democratic? that’s the question. i think if you transplanted the two 18th century systems of America and Britain into today’s world, the American one would probably be judged democratic (is it even any different to now constitutionlly?), whereas the British one definitely wouldn’t.


I can’t make head nor tail of this table:


George Washington came before and John Adams was his vice president.


It did lead me to this:



pretty incredible that there are only 5 countries which haven’t had some sort of power dispute in the last 100 years (4 if we exclude Australia)


As Hamilton has taught me, until Thomas Jefferson changed it, the presidential candidate who lost the election became the Vice President.


aha so you’re saying I won the thread


the cunt can’t even lose properly


Is Hamilton that problematic musical that middle-class white people love? :wink:

Also that is a scary thought.


Hmm, not really sure.

What I find odd is the notion that if the same party wins then power hasn’t been transferred, even though presidential candidates are really quite different so it’s not like the incumbent isn’t leaving even if Clinton gets in.

Anyway, this election is all about how long we have to wait until Michelle Obama runs I guess.


ok so you’re saying i probably won the thread


the fuck do you quote multiple replies anyway?