It's Been The Law, Since Thee Law Was The Law.

We're a republic, not a democracy.

We are a republic that chooses our leaders through a democratic process. It is the process and its outcome that are germane in this meme.

States elect the president, used to be no popular vote on that either.

"Now, this isn't to say that one cannot argue against the excesses of majoritarian government — or even against majoritarian government in toto. There are many plausible and respectable arguments against it.

But, if anyone wants to argue against majoritarianism, he should simply do so. There is no need to rely on a half-baked usage of the writings of "the Founding Fathers" who clearly supported a political system in which majority votes play a big part in selecting elected officials, and which is obviously a democracy according to the modern usage of the term." Ryan McMaken--Mises Institute

Normally I do not post nor read links on this site. But, rather than waste everyone else's time with a discussion on the "Great Republic vs Democracy Debate," I am going to suggest an article that I think sums the issue up, nicely. It is from a well known conservative and pro-Republican source, The Mises Institute. It is factual without being long-winded. Remember, this is not some off the wall leftist anarchist. The writer. is a well-known and highly regarded conservative. Your argument should be directed to him. https://mises.org/wire/stop-saying-were-republic-not-democracy

That argument would only apply to a few narrow line of thought and ignores that we have checks against the majority being able to push their will over the whole of the population. That's why Trump won the presidency without winning the popular vote, and that goes to the core of your comment.

If you really want to nit-pick, we can be called a democratic republic, but we're factually a constitutional federal republic, which means states get say over their own areas and people elect their representatives though democracy, but states sill elect the president instead of the people.

Let me guess, you have no intention of reading why a well known and highly regarded conservative philosopher thinks you missed the point. We are a Republic because that was the best alternative to a monarch in the mid-late 1700s. The fact that the founders gave the House of Representatives precedence in the Constitution and gave them the authority to initiate taxation, reflects the importance they placed on the people's democratically elected legislators. Democracy was clearly not an anathema to them.

No, I read it. You just assumed a falsehood because it got you the answer you wanted. But let me repeat,

"f you really want to nit-pick, we can be called a democratic republic, but we're factually a constitutional federal republic, which means states get say over their own areas and people elect their representatives though democracy, but states sill elect the president instead of the people."

I don't want to "nit-pick." I already said in the first four words of my first reply, "We are a republic." You just have reached a different conclusion concerning what that means than does the Mises Institute Board Member and author. Hence, the college freshman argument you have proudly trotted out.