At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
Here the question, At The United States Constitution, of course, provides for no “direct democracy” at all, whereas almost all state constitutions, including that of Texas, provides for at least a measure of ‘direct democracy” in addition to “representative democracy.” Again, imagine yourself as a delegate to the same two conventions mentioned in the first question. Would you recommend identical or different responses to those delegates who, in the case of the United States Constitution, wished to add some element of direct democracy, in contrast to those delegates to the Texas constitutional convention who wished to eliminate it? To the extent that you support any direct democracy at all, please specify which particular kinds you would support and which you would oppose.
Well first of all, this is a matter of opinion, and I can't help you with that part. Are you or are you not in favor of direct democracy?
Alright, what are some reasons that you support it?
well it legitimize the person who is elected into office power as oppsoed to the electoral college which does not take majority vote into consideration when electing a candidate
Alright, now what form of direct democracy are we talking about here? Looking closer, I see that there's different kinds.
I'm just talking about direct democracy I'm not sure about represntative democracy because I think that means the same thing
but that my only argument, I don't know of more, and I really don't have a counter- argument, maybe that the average voter don't have the background knowledge to vote like education or don't have not financial stable, but that sound elitist
oops! I meant are not financial stable
Representative democracy isn't quite the same as direct democracy. There's several different kinds of direct democracy, the main two being participatory democracy and deliberative democracy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participatory_democracy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deliberative_democracy Which of those two would you support?
I like deliberative democracy since it both representative democracy and direct democracy, which I believe direct democracy is good at state level, but at the national level whether have representative, since all state are different and most people only know their own state
Well there you go, now you know what to write about. You support direct democracy under the form of deliberative democracy. Provide all of your reasoning, put it in essay format, and there you have it.
It also says to use a counter argument
A counter argument versus what?
scratch that, It says would you want direct democracy for Texas and US government?
or do you want one to have direct democracy and the other not to have direct democracy and why
Providing a counter-argument to any position you hold, and then refuting it, is the way you make your own argument stronger. You anticipate your opponents' objections (the "counter-arguments") to your position in other words, and then counter those arguments, in turn, with further points of your own. Just to clarify that point.