Prior to the mid-1800s there wasn’t even a popular vote; people voted for their representatives and the representatives chose the president. This slippery slope of republic -> republic with a popular vote -> republic w/ referendums -> full democracy will be our undoing.
"But a representative democracy, where the right of election is well secured and regulated & the exercise of the legislative, executive and judiciary authorities, is vested in select persons, chosen really and not nominally by the people, will in my opinion be most likely to be happy, regular and durable."
Is there any evidence that countries or US states which allow referendums have worse political environments than those which forbid them? Also, how many countries and states that allow referendums have fallen down the slippery slope from there to "full democracy" and whatever disaster you picture at the bottom of that slope?
A joke, right?
I can’t speak for all states, but the last midterms in FL alone had 10 referendums, some of which changed the state forever in big ways, constitutional amendments, etc. (e.g., allowing felons to vote, permanent tax changes, etc.).
If you think that doesn’t represent a low enough bottom of that slippery slope, you’re out of your fucking mind.
Allowing felons to vote sounds correct to me. It also sounds correct to me that we each get to vote about that correctness rather than your opinion being the one that matters.
"tax changes" is not bad or good until you define the nature of the changes and successfully convince everyone else that they are bad. (that darn "your opinion is merely your opinion" thing again)