In a two party system, there is literally nothing more terrifying than your base threatening to leave you.
Don’t kid yourself. It’s not terrifying, it’s just annoying because they have to spend more money on media influence to keep people in line and/or shift some stances (or pander) to attract other voters from the other side. Once again, you’re underestimating the entrenched power and media resources they already have.
You’re oversimplifying a much more complex issue and you’re wrong, but I clicked “like” on your post because you didn’t bother to include calling me a a moron or idiot this time, thanks.
The problem was that it was a very long response to position I never took and that you never actually directly addressed the position I advocated once
when your vote won’t otherwise count.
And that’s what you missed and that’s what I addressed. Votes to a third party don’t influence Democrats much at all (in most situations).
Democrats will shift to the right to offset the far-left losses by gathering more conservatives which are much easier to harvest than lefties are. I explained why this is the case in a previous post (and in my list which I’ve linked to yet again below). Getting support from the left is like herding cats.
Democrats rarely shift quickly to the left because they know it’s political suicide. There’s no money in it, not enough concerted support and it’ll basically de-fund their campaigns.
Extensive Pew Research shows that the ideology of most registered voters is conservative (see “advantages” list link below for why). The ideology of most Independent registered voters are moderate, but also more conservative than liberal (see “advantages” list for why).
This is to not say these ideological conservatives don’t vote for Democrats (they do), but many will switch in a heartbeat to Republican (or not vote at all) when Democrats go too far to the “left”. And by “left” I mean this as defined by their standards influenced and distorted by corporate mainstream media.
I explained the dynamics of this earlier and in my list called:
ADVANTAGES OF THE CORPORATIST RIGHT
Seriously reconsider its implications. It’s complicated, but that’s the reality.
I’ve personally known Democratic candidates that really want to be further to the left, but they often learn the hard way that they must push to the left very slowly over time. Otherwise, their ass ends up out in the street and greater evil Republicans happily step into their place.
This is the reality. They can’t quickly move to the left because there’s not enough support from the left. Obama had to have the absolutely horrific disaster of two GW Bush terms preceeding his campaign (among other factors) just to be able to even finally pander to the left and still win.
Do you not understand that if a state is a winner takes all state, and the state is solidly blue, that voting for a third party does not influence the results of the election, but it can scare the shit out of the party if the numbers start to climb too high?
I already addressed that. Third parties don’t have that kind of granular control and I already explained why.
Better than Romney? Sure, but you can still be pissed.
Where did I say people can’t be angry? Just don’t allow that anger to make you irrational and spin your wheels.
I didn’t expect much from Obama (
06/24/2008 04:29 PM) considering where we started after two disastrous GW Bush admins, but I’m still resentful and disappointed nonetheless. There’s nothing wrong with that.
But, it’s also about time for Obama’s base (former or otherwise) to look into the mirror and realize they shouldn’t have been so incredibly focused on that national election without putting that same effort and emphasis on local elections.
Putting all that energy into electing Obama without also putting in that same effort to thwart Republican filibusters and obstructionism was harebrained. Put that dissapointment to good use and try some introspection and better strategies in the future.
So one more time, this is my proposal.
You shifted from your more inane statements earlier and I congratulate you. Next time avoid misconstruing and exaggerating my positions while implying I’m an “idiot” in the first place and we can save some time.
BECAUSE This will do more to influence the party than giving them your rubberstamp vote that is not needed and will do absolutely nothing to influence the election.
I could see it working in specific cases with specific candidates at a local level, but as a general rule… no.
Sounds like a great theory, but it’s generally not worked in practice.
All that precious time, money and effort supporting and running a third party campaign (you can’t win) would be better used with a long-term strategy of attempting to counter the current power structure by eating away at it slowly over time. The two-party system is too powerful and entrenched for quick, magical change. I hope that this Obama fiasco will teach people that.
All the wasted resources on a born-to-lose third party campaign should be dedicated instead to desperately needed public education that counters mainstream media influence that keeps so many Americans in the dark (and leaning conservative). There’d also be more resources for these kind of actions as well. Once gain, it’s a long-term approach, it’s not quick, it’s not “sexy”, but it’ll actually work over time.
The groundwork hasn’t yet been laid for a third party to influence the Democrats, much less win. In most cases (even the ones you laid out) it’s much smarter to put your resources and/or votes elsewhere.
Also, Democrats’ greater diversity means that party leaders are bound to have more trouble managing their coalition than the Republicans will theirs. Let’s stop making it more difficult for liberal Democrats to organize and stop with the current third party pipe dreams. It’s a distraction, a waste of resources and it ironically keeps us further to the right when it’s not outright helping to usher in greater evil.
