can a democratic government ignore the will of the majority?

no--a  democratic government that is not corrupt cannot ignore the will of the people, because democracy, by definition, is government that expresses the will of the majority of its citizens.

why, then, if the majority of U.S. citizens favor stricter gun control laws, doesn't the will of the majority prevail? 

answer: because our government is corrupt.

why is our government corrupt?

answer: instead of government that is controlled by the will of the majority, our government is controlled by a few--party bosses, lobbyists and the parties' wealthiest donors. corrupt politicians, instead of representing the will of the majority of the people who elect them, represent party bosses and wealthy lobbyists, who give corrupt politicians money to elect and re-elect them again and again.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/democracychronicles/16823831141/in/photostream/

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

had enough? 

who do you trust? 

1. someone who has values similar to yours?
The good, the bad & the ugly: let's make America great again
2. someone who doesn't?
3. political parties, financed by billionaire corporations and PACs?

here's how government works:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIAJl-wZElg

if you vote for a republican or a democrat, then it's not the person who you voted for who is in control--it's the party.

File:Two party system diagram.png - Wikimedia Commons

in the next election--national, state or local--vote for anyone except a democrat or a republican. soon the republican and democratic parties will dry up and die. nothing will be better for the United States of America.

PS similarly, by refusing to patronize dishonest and biased media, they too will shrivel up and die--a triple win for honesty in government, for integrity in reporting the actions of government, and for us. 

george washington on political parties

"The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume."

The Founding Fathers Tried to Warn Us About the Threat From a Two-Party System

george washington had it right. it's not a third political party that we need--it's NO political parties. We need representatives who represent us, are virtuous, and who will work for the common good. We don't need representatives who are beholding to a political party's rigid ideology, being that of its wealthiest donors.

who do you trust? 

1. someone who has values similar to yours?
The good, the bad & the ugly: let's make America great again
2. someone who doesn't?
3. political parties, financed by billionaire corporations and PACs?

here's how government works:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIAJl-wZElg

if you vote for a republican or a democrat, then it's not the person who you voted for who is in control--it's the party.

File:Two party system diagram.png - Wikimedia Commons

in the next election--national, state or local--vote for anyone except a democrat or a republican. soon the republican and democratic parties will dry up and die. nothing will be better for the United States of America.

PS similarly, by refusing to patronize dishonest and biased media, they too will shrivel up and die--a triple win for honesty in government, for integrity in reporting the actions of government, and for us. 

tired of the same old actors?

"we don't need congress to change our two party system of government, or to pass a law limiting terms. why would they? neither would be in their, or their party's, best interests. 

we can use our vote to change our two-party system of government and to limit terms. 

out with the old and in with the new." 
minds of mush: tired of the same old actors? 

if we:

• don't vote 
• vote republican or democrat because "that's the way that ___________ (parent(s), church, media, teacher, friend, etc.) always votes/voted"
• always vote straight republican/democrat regardless of the candidate or issues

then are: 

• we responsible citizens of a free government? 
• or are we slaves to government that is not "of the people, by the people, for the people"? 

if it's the latter, then freedom "will perish from the earth". (Abraham Lincoln)