politics

18870 readers

3822 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Analysis | The problem for third parties? America is not a political free market. (www.washingtonpost.com)

submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

23 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Americans are deeply frustrated with politics. They see the country heading in the wrong direction. They are regularly forced to choose between two candidates they don’t particularly like. Between 40 and 50 percent of the country identifies not as Democrat or Republican but as independent.

Here is what it takes to get on the ballot in Pennsylvania. Read through that, noting the difference between candidates for “political parties” and “minor political parties.” Imagine you are thinking about putting forth a challenge to an incumbent state officeholder but don’t want to run as a Democrat or a Republican. What are the odds that you get tripped up by the rules?

The problem, of course, is that Americans have strong views about specific things on which they are often not going to be willing to compromise. The Forward essay criticizes the far left for wanting to get rid of guns and the far right for wanting to get rid of gun laws. But that’s not where the parties are, because the parties are responsive to the coalitions they’ve built. If you simply take some independents and sit them down — much less partisans! — you’re going to very quickly find a lot of important issues on which there is not a reachable consensus. Then what?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Oh, that username hits me right in the fails. Let me guess. The rest of it is 'missed the shot, awakened the whole pod, and my squad went down in a hail of alien gunfire'? 🤣

Anyway, yeah, I pointed France out in another post. Third Parties end up hurting the majority party closest to them on the scale, and cause the country to fall to the opposite Major Party. In the best of circumstances, it results in things you hold dear to be torn down and things you detest to be built up, and when the opposite party has a heavy xenophobic fascist core? Well, people far closer to home to you than any Palestinian ever could be will suffer, as will you yourself. It's fine if you can make yourself into a martyr alone (fly over to Gaza and help them directly), but when you make other people into victims because your chosen faction wasn't put ahead of everyone else? That is serious psychopath behaviour right there.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Palestine I think... is a massive mess for a LOT of historical and well documented reasons.

But it also very much highlighted that people don't really even understand how to be a single issue voter. If you are pro-Palestine above all else? Good for you. Vote in your interests.

But even then, I am not aware of ANY election in the past year where it was "Pro-Palestine vs Anti-Palestine". it was more "Anti-Palestine vs Pro-Genocide". But, especially in the US, there was this idea that Biden deserved to lose because he was Anti-Palestine without any willingness to acknowledge that trump is pro-genocide.

Which gets back to why it is so much easier for one side (generally right wing) to unify. Because WE all want something and want to get it. They just want to make sure others DON'T get something.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

I don't disagree that Palestine is a big mess and we're not so much pro-Palestine as anti-Project 2025. I don't want to see Palestinians killed. That's why I'm voting Democrat, because historical precedence shows that one of two candidates will take office in November: The Republican (who has promised to accelerate Israel's murder and subjugation of the Palestinians) or the Democrat. Yes, I'd like an option besides the Republican and the Democrat, but until we dispose of the Electoral College AND get something like RCV, the only path to less genocide in Israel is Democrats, even if they are more wishy-washy on opposing Israel's murder and subjugation of Palestine. But all it takes is a few tens of thousands of people to be hoodwinked into voting third party in bitterly divided swing states and we all get Project 2025.