“…and everyone needs one, every day!”
– Harry Shearer
(Well, he was referring to the Olympic Movement, but still…)
1 Like
Yeah, I’m not seeing a good rationale for voting third party; Trump may be full of hot air, but that just means that if elected 1) he’ll rubber stamp whatever Congress puts in front of him and/or 2) rubber stamp anything Pence tells him to, and as long as they kiss his ass. If Congress is Republican controlled, that’s bad full stop. If it’s divided or Democratically controlled, nothing gets done. Particularly on halting and reversing global warming while mitigating its effects, there will be no progress, an probably regression.
If Trump is serious, well, yeah, he’ll be impeached or there’ll be a coup, whether or not Congress is Republican or Democratic. Probably Pence becomes president.
The Democrats, on the other hand, are not nearly as beholden to Big Carbon, and have demonstrated an interest in civilization continuing as we know it…
3 Likes
What do you believe the path to a third party that can win actually is, if they never run?
Some people say the answer is downticket elections… which ignores the fact that the parties they’re usually talking about (Green and Libertarian) do indeed also have local campaigns. As does Socialist Alternative, who is supporting Jill Stein.
Some people say the answer is to change the system so it’s more receptive to third parties and independents… which they are also trying to do, promoting ranked choice voting (and FairVote specifically), fighting for ballot access, inclusion in debates and so forth.
Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are, respectively, the #1 and #2 most disliked presidential candidates in US history, at least since such things were polled about. That seems like an ideal time for third parties to make a move.
3 Likes
But, when you inherit your father’s things…all the monogrammed items are still useful.
3 Likes
Or rising. Or fracturing. Really, it’s impossible to tell at this point. I’d like to think the Republican party is headed towards extinction but the entrenched Us vs Them two-party system means that every voter and aspiring politician feels herded to join either the Republicans or the Democrats.
As I said in one of my posts above, it’s going to take a critical mass of would-be defectors within either party (or a sufficient number from both, though that’s absurdly unlikely) to either overhaul their host party or form a separate one.
Honestly, I’d rather see the birth of a multi-party system than the death of the Republican party. That part can come later.
1 Like
Compare and contrast:
8 Likes
I think it’s a prerequisite: first the Republican party needs to be safely neutered. In the period where we only have one major party, people can vote for third parties without it being a spoiler, and the Democratic coalition will no longer have an external threat to hold it together. It all depends on how much control the conservative Democratic establishment can maintain when we don’t have to defend against Republican extremism.
1 Like
They absolutely should run. I’m just suggesting that after you mount the third party run, and it becomes apparent late in the election cycle that you aren’t going to get the votes to even be within smelling distance of a win, it’s time for pragmatism to take over. At that point, you make the choice that you feel will best serve the country’s interests, or acknowledge you’re ceding that choice to someone else. The obvious problem with this approach is that you have nothing beyond polling to show what the actual support IS for a third party, hobbling the party’s chances for the next election.
I simply don’t know what it takes to make a viable third party (although I hope someone more savvy than I figures it out). I’m just saying that if the initial support isn’t there for getting your candidate elected, voting for said candidate anyway in protest will give you no short-term control over the direction of the country, and (if history is any indicator), no long-term control either.
1 Like
What plausible chain of events would lead to this scenario?
1 Like
I think you need for all of the major parties to be safe for the majority of people; where the differences between them are not only trivial in practice, but also seen as trivial by the majority. Or just have one major party that can be safely chipped away at by multiple third parties. Once it is reduced to a plurality, the third parties can band to together to change the rules.
Well, it’s like this: let’s say you have a business that consistently carries a lousy product, is rude to their customers, and always overcharges. What do you do?
Most people would just go somewhere else. If pretty much everyone does that, the business will either start doing a better job in the hopes of bringing back their customers, or they will go out of business.
So what happens if everyone keeps shopping there? What if they have a monopoly and you have no choice but to shop there? What if the only other store in town is owned by a white supremacist who donates a portion of every sale to anti-gay causes?
What happens is that they stay in business, and they stop even pretending to give a shit about their customers. The products get shoddier and more overpriced, and the service gets even worse. You will bend over and take whatever they give you, and be grateful because at least they exist.
And that’s where we are with the Democratic Party. they don’t give a shit about us, and aren’t going to because they’re our only option. We’ve written letters and marched and tried to support a reforming candidate within their system, and NONE of it has done jack shit.
The only thing we have left at our disposal short of actually taking up arms, is to NOT VOTE for them, and hope that they’ll take us seriously the next time.
Sometimes you have to walk away from the abusive relationship- even if you have nowhere to go, even if it puts you at risk. If you stay, things will only get worse.
4 Likes
I hope the ones we’re seeing unfold right now are the start… That they continue alienating moderates and minorities until the various factions begin to desert the party and try to succeed with an untainted name.
That said, I’m only optimistic about that occurring to the national Republican party. They’re likely to suffer repeated failure nationally, but it looks like they’re improving their hold in specific regions.
And thinking about how only about 1/5 of the votes can actually be swayed, that 40% is more or less the floor for both Republicans and Democrats (See Goldwater, McGovern, Trump…), just saps my confidence further.
So thank you Snowlark for sapping me of optimism.
1 Like
I see what you’re getting at; but the analogy doesn’t work for me. In this scenario, people have a choice about whether to shop but failure to shop doesn’t mean someone else gets to shop for you, and you have to live with the result.
I think a more accurate analogy would be this: you own a house with a leaky roof. It’s your only house. There are two contractors. Contractor A does a good job, but is unreliable about scheduling and tends to get its workers hurt on the job. Contractor B will get the job done quickly, but is known to use inferior materials.
So neither does exactly what you want, although one or the other will align more closely with your repair goals. If someone then starts up Contractor C, but it goes out of business before you can use it because it isn’t patronized, you still have the problem of a leaky roof. You can choose not to use Contractor A or B; but you still have wet carpet and buckets in your living room.
One, I’m at least a little hopeful that they will take some concerns seriously this time; maybe not out of the goodness of their hearts but out of self-preservation. Trump, like Brexit was, is in part so popular because he seems like he could burn down EVERYTHING. So you already have a threat they might be taking seriously this cycle.
Though I suppose you might be an example of the alternative if they don’t; people who were willing to give them the benefit of the doubt this cycle might not next cycle, just as you apparently will not this cycle.
Two, and this might be a nitpick, but people like me who voted for Hillary are to blame for Bernie not getting the nomination, not the Democractic party politicians.
Edit: Oh, and I don’t like your abusive relationship analogy; it assumes you have somewhere to go that’s not worse. Granted, having not personally experienced either I can’t truly judge whether abuse or homelessness is worse (homelessness being the analogy I’m choosing for ineffective third parties).
Edit2: Actually, even that ignores that you will still suffer the abuse, whether you stay or not… Analogies suck.
1 Like
“Pragmatism” doesn’t need to take over, it’s already in charge. It’s been the cover for the Democratic Party’s drift to center-right.
https://www.thenation.com/article/three-times-when-impractical-movements-led-to-real-change/
4 Likes
Crap, I forgot the possibility of Trump of not only being serious, but successfully consolidating power… How much of our military is made of the same demographics that support Trump? Plus the militias…
There’s no need to draft them
You could hear us laugh then
The poor and black all need the room and board
Did I say that out loud?
Being a bit more left wing might hit the incomes of politicians. Once they are on board, there’s always the temptation to take the bus just a little more towards low taxes and less social security. Pull that ladder up behind you, Jack.
I can’t think of a single group that politicians have less regard for than non-voters.
3 Likes
Obama said on the Tonight Show that Obama supports Two Party Politics
Depends on the definition, at or below sea level.
