I feel that some modern liberal values, ironically, tend to cannibalize the ability to truly fight what we believe in. We're too afraid of talking about certain things or people or issues for fear of causing offense or accidentally stepping on toes, which occupies the time and effort needed to actually *do* something about righting the wrongs.
These two parties run thousands (and hundreds but the Green Party just formed a few years ago) of candidates in every kind of election at every level.
Automation isn't about want, it's about reality. It's happening, and dealing the consequences should be the conversation.
Not at allI hope you aren't referring to the straight up jokes that are the Libertarian and Green Parties.
Doing absolutely nothing all the time followed by throwing a random-ass candidate at the general every four years, losing handily then crying about how you didn't get fair coverage isn't exactly what we need.
Problem is the calls for a third party don't have any ideological cohesion beyond "raaargh we are so angry". It would fall apart very quickly.
It wouldn't be so bad if liberals could at least work together without attacking each other too but even that feels like a tall order.
Running a Presidential candidate is the most cost-effective method of ballot access by far. With Gubernatorial candidates being second. Then Senate candidates depending on the year.
Just because you don't pay attention to the parties when they aren't running Presidential candidates...well...that kinda proves the point.
Yes, they are, but Americans at large seem to be out of touch with the world. We expect our politicians to operate like experts while denigrating experts who try to warn us about our politicians.
Campaigns create party leaders.Sure would be nice if the party had a clear vision or a capable leader.
No, as the gap between right and left continues to widen, one of those parties will just snap over in the other one's direction.Schattenjäger;234559499 said:Not at all
I think as the gap between the right and left continues to widen.... there will be room for a centrist party that takes the best of both parties and runs with it
.. made up of both moderate republicans and democrats
Automation isn't about want, it's about reality. It's happening, and dealing the consequences should be the conversation.
http://nypost.com/2017/04/23/this-is-why-michael-bloomberg-didnt-run-for-president/Bloomberg should have run on the "abortions for some, miniature American flags for others" platform. Perhaps the only chance an independent candidate has had, however slim, was running as a contrast to the two most disliked presidential candidates in history.
It's not about winning the Presidency, it's about fucking ballot access and then hopefully winning down ballot to build towards winning up ballot.But the only way you're ever going to win a Presidency as a third party is if you have enough folks in the House and Senate to give your guys the Presidency and the VP because even if you do win the only win you're gong to have inevitably is one where you don't get the required umber of EC votes for the majority so it'll go to the House where whatever party controls it will pick their guy and whoever controls the Senate will pick their guy and ta-da if it ain't you mister or miss third party you won absolutely fuck all
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sewer_SocialismI think the best potential for a political shake-up would be extrapartisan political organizations which can endorse candidates who share their views and influence policy at least on a local level. This way, more radical groups can support candidates who might be rejected by the larger party apparatus, and also pressure the larger party apparatus to accept certain views.
Democratic Socialists of America has just begun doing this on a very small scale, having gotten a couple city council seats in the past month. While not being a political party in the traditional sense, the DSA can endorse candidates like a traditional political interest group as well as field its own candidates. It's only got 20,000 dues-paying members scattered across the US, but if the DSA continues to grow it may be able to support Democratic or independent candidates that the Democratic Party passes over, changing the calculus of local politics and creating a cadre of young people eager to participate local elections.
I'd expect similar groups to emerge in the next couple years to represent many other ideological interests.
Does it NEED to happen is the question? A lot of people will be screwed over in the next however many years. Just because. We don't need it.
Who is the "We"? You and I? Yes. The major corporations? They need it for their bottom line. We've accepted it thus far. I don't see it changing any time soon.Does it NEED to happen is the question? A lot of people will be screwed over in the next however many years. Just because. We don't need it.
But the only way you're ever going to win a Presidency as a third party is if you have enough folks in the House and Senate to give your guys the Presidency and the VP because even if you do win the only win you're gong to have inevitably is one where you don't get the required umber of EC votes for the majority so it'll go to the House where whatever party controls it will pick their guy and whoever controls the Senate will pick their guy and ta-da if it ain't you mister or miss third party you won absolutely fuck all
It's not about winning the Presidency, it's about fucking ballot access and then hopefully winning down ballot to build towards winning up ballot.
Getting a Presidential candidate on the ballot and getting enough votes saves you tremendously as all your down ballot candidates no longer need to petition to be on it in most states.
Does it NEED to happen is the question? A lot of people will be screwed over in the next however many years. Just because. We don't need it.
A third wealthy New Yorker is really what we needed to shake up that race.Bloomberg should have run on the "abortions for some, miniature American flags for others" platform. Perhaps the only chance an independent candidate has had, however slim, was running as a contrast to the two most disliked presidential candidates in history.
People always complain that politicians suck, but politicians are elected by the people to represent us, so maybe we as citizens all suck :/
People always complain that politicians suck, but politicians are elected by the people to represent us, so maybe we as citizens all suck :/
Yeah, it's definitely the 99% who are the root of the problem.
Aye.I think third parties could be very, very beneficial to US politics, but they've got no business participating in general elections. Most existing third parties really only exist for the spectacle. If the Green Party cared about enacting meaningful change, they'd start from the bottom and spend their millions on local races.
By participating in municipal and state legislative politics, third parties can make their interests known in a big way and give themselves a solid institutional basis. Even if a third party is not big enough to win a federal election, they could ideally serve as a broker, demanding concessions from major-party candidates in exchange for an endorsement.
That extant third parties don't behave this way shows how farcical they all are.
Who is the "We"? You and I? Yes. The major corporations? They need it for their bottom line. We've accepted it thus far. I don't see it changing any time soon.
We can't stop progress on automation, and we can't be bothered to think about a social safety net like UBI because the American public has been brainwashed by right wing BS.
And in lots of places all over the country the 2018 candidates that are being lined up are the same usual suspects because the Dems have learned nothing and assume that they're going to win without having to actually make any changes. The party deserves what it is going to get in 2018 but the American people don't.
Its self defeating. At my age and where I'm at in life, no I do not want it because I recognize my job can be automated. Then there is the argument of going to school like its not going to be ridiculously competitive in the future. Unemployment will reach stupid levels at some point. If someone campaigns on the narrative of trying to stop it.....then lights out and you know it.
Its self defeating. At my age and where I'm at in life, no I do not want it because I recognize my job can be automated. Then there is the argument of going to school like its not going to be ridiculously competitive in the future. Unemployment will reach stupid levels at some point. If someone campaigns on the narrative of trying to stop it.....then lights out and you know it.
Third parties in general elections would be perfectly fine and beneficial if the US did what every other sensible nation does and held open primaries prior to a run off.I think third parties could be very, very beneficial to US politics, but they've got no business participating in general elections. Most existing third parties really only exist for the spectacle. If the Green Party cared about enacting meaningful change, they'd start from the bottom and spend their millions on local races.
By participating in municipal and state legislative politics, third parties can make their interests known in a big way and give themselves a solid institutional basis. Even if a third party is not big enough to win a federal election, they could ideally serve as a broker, demanding concessions from major-party candidates in exchange for an endorsement.
That extant third parties don't behave this way shows how farcical they all are.
I would love to see the number one reason cited for why people think Dems are out of touch. If it's "they are too liberal" would the whiners in this thread be cool with them moderating? I doubt it.
We had what, 56% turnout last election? And it's drastically worse in midterms. That's pathetic. I understand there are some deliberate obstacles to voting, but the fundamental problem is that people don't care. The only way to solve this is by making voting compulsory or somehow making people care. I'm very skeptical as to the latter.Yeah, it's definitely the 99% who are the root of the problem.
Despite Trump's low approval numbers, the poll showed him retaining support among his base, with 96% of people who said they voted for him saying they would do so again. The poll showed only 85% of those who voted for Hillary Clinton would do so again, with most of those who would not saying they would either go with a third-party candidate or not vote at all.
They wouldn't have those millions* and they wouldn't be on the ballot. Participating in general elections is the only way the parties can get anywhere, especially...you know...on the ballot.I think third parties could be very, very beneficial to US politics, but they've got no business participating in general elections. Most existing third parties really only exist for the spectacle. If the Green Party cared about enacting meaningful change, they'd start from the bottom and spend their millions on local races.
By participating in municipal and state legislative politics, third parties can make their interests known in a big way and give themselves a solid institutional basis. Even if a third party is not big enough to win a federal election, they could ideally serve as a broker, demanding concessions from major-party candidates in exchange for an endorsement.
That extant third parties don't behave this way shows how farcical they all are.
We had what, 56% turnout last election? And it's drastically worse in midterms. That's pathetic. I understand there are some deliberate obstacles to voting, but the fundamental problem is that people don't care. The only way to solve this is by making voting compulsory or somehow making people care. I'm very skeptical as to the latter.
We're boned
We had what, 56% turnout last election? And it's drastically worse in midterms. That's pathetic. I understand there are some deliberate obstacles to voting, but the fundamental problem is that people don't care. The only way to solve this is by making voting compulsory or somehow making people care. I'm very skeptical as to the latter.
Voting needs to be made easier, and incredibly convenient everywhere in the U.S, but we certainly know why that's not happening.
We're boned
People always complain that politicians suck, but politicians are elected by the people to represent us, so maybe we as citizens all suck :/
Election day isn't even a holiday yet we take the an entire day to recognize Columbus, one of the biggest pieces of shit in history.We had what, 56% turnout last election? And it's drastically worse in midterms. That's pathetic. I understand there are some deliberate obstacles to voting, but the fundamental problem is that people don't care. The only way to solve this is by making voting compulsory or somehow making people care. I'm very skeptical as to the latter.