So, if they’re successful and end up espousing a lot of great liberal ideas, they split the liberal vote and ensure conservative victories. If they have a lot of conservative ideas, they split the conservative vote. On the off chance they could actually make a difference, we should get in there and stuff their ballot box with anti-abortion pro-gun tinfoil hat madness. Better another Perot than another Nader.
Mondo 2016?
Much of this can be achieved by modification of the rules for the Senate or the House, and a majority could do it. Currently, it’s easy for lobbyists to sneak their provisions into bills in the dead of night, and everyone plays dumb as to how that provision got into the bill. If every modification to a proposed piece of legislation is treated like a checkin, with full history preserved at each stage, you’d have a name attached to every revision and there would be nowhere to hide.
The people who would lose most if we did this typically call themselves “centrists”. They have no strong ideology beyond keeping the donors happy.
I think that there is a degree of false equivalence to the notion of “spoiler” parties/candidates. Some people will vote only for those who they deem qualified for the position. That I vote for candidate X in no way means that I otherwise would have voted for candidate W.
That’s nice logic, but the actual election results disagree.
…but not Radical Centrists, I think? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_center_(politics)
It’s the GNU/Open Source Party!!!
jeez
Democracy isn’t liberal, it isn’t conservative… it’d be nice to get away from that liberal vs conservative dichotomy, which is one reason we’re offering an alternative. And our goal is not about running candidates, though we’ll eventually get there. Our goal is to create a political alternative that isn’t “proprietary.” And while it’s not something we’ve discussed yet, I could imagine espousing a more parliamentary form of government.
Is either party working their asses off to suppress the votes of minorities? Is either talking about repealing the 14th and 17th amendments? The game of “both sides do it equally” and “both parties are the same” is only possible if you completely ignore the things political actors actually say and do.
Politics?
I thought that we were all invited over to Stallman’s place to “compile” some beer.
@Boundegar Okay, but what does that have to do with what I said?
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
