Story Highlights
- Third time support has exceeded 60%, along with 2017 and 2021
- Republicans primarily behind the increase, with 58% now in favor
- Political independents remain group most likely to favor third party
Would love a third and a fourth and a fifth party. Unfortunately, that doesn’t work in a winner-take-all system based on the Electoral College.
Yeah, I feel like any 3rd party is just there to siphon votes away from one of the other two parties. We need a change to the system, along with additional parties, so that it’s not just tilting the balance back towards one of the top two. I wish we could also somehow decouple Supreme Court nominations from the Presidency, or add additional justices to make it more representative. As it is, we’ve got a ridiculously small group of nine people making decisions that affect the lives of hundreds of millions.
RANKED CHOICE VOTING
make parties irrelevant
Comparison of various voting systems…
make parties irrelevant
Precisely why they will never let this happen
Yep, all of us plebs want RCV. But the problem is in order to get it, we need one of two major parties in control to make the change. But they don’t want to make the change because they know if they do, us plebs will actually start voting for independent parties and they’ll lose their power. :(
It’s not about voting for a party in RCV. It effectively solves almost all of the US political dysfunction. With RCV…
- each political party in the mix will actually have to campaign to win elections (no swing states),
- gerrymandering will be a thing of the past,
- the electoral college will finally die,
- the people will get a candidate that more closely matches their desired candidate, and
- best of all, we wouldn’t have to vote between a douche or a turd sandwich.
Honestly, I get erect just thinking about how much better things could be with this system of voting. It’s essentially like a unionization for our political system, which is why it will never happen.
Why would the wolves opt to remove themselves from the hen house?
https://www.democracynow.org/2012/10/17/green_partys_jill_stein_cheri_honkala
obama and biden had security chain the third party candidate to a chair during the 2016 election for wanting to be included
Murica will never allow more than the demopublican party
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/biden-promise-tracker/?ruling=true
I’m not from America so I have no idea how this party system works, but the point here is I love parties 🎊
Well, you see, we have the party of empathy that caters to big business, and then we have the other one that was once more traditional and is now kind of crazy that caters to big business.
Ahh, which is which?
deleted by creator
Basically, we’re only allowed 2 parties per year, and if you want any more, you have to buy a subscription, or else the party police will take away your party privileges. We’re hoping that with enough complaints, they’ll allow us another party before having to pay.
deleted by creator
You can protect the people’s right of assembly, or you can ban political parties. You can’t do both.
You cannot stop people from agreeing to all campaign for a single candidate, but you don’t need to put it in big letters on the ballot. A ballot can just be a list of names. The major parties can inform most voters who they endorse for president. They may also be able to get most people to associate a Congressional or Senate candidate with their party. But, when a voter is looking at their ballot, there is no way that they will know if a party enforced “Smith” or “Jones” for state treasurer, unless the candidate changes their legal name to “Democrat Jones”.
It would probably mean that most voters will just not vote for down ballot candidates, except a very few who brought along the party’s list of recommended candidates or crazies like me who try to research candidates on the ballot.
Also, there is no reason for the state to host and administer primaries for major parties, police that a given voter does not vote in multiple parties’ primaries, or forbid a locally popular candidate from appearing on the ballot just because they are a member of a national party who endorsed another candidate.
I am not sure if it would be the best choice, though, since it would make it more likely that a party insider would get elected (since they are going to appeal to party die hards).
deleted by creator
If only people voted for what they wanted instead of against what they were scared of because that number is more than enough for a political shift even if there were two alternative parties, one to each main one. The ‘wasted vote’ propagand is doing more work keeping republicans in charge than the supreme court is. Since more republicans than democrats want a third party, so the only worry should be that too many democrats get elected if we tried.
No it’s not. No third party has anywhere close to a meaningful support level to start talking about the system being the reason. Not only are they nowhere close, they run unqualified or failed two party system candidates with untested or even well thought out ideas and use the entire thing as largely a grift to sell books or gain klout. Recently party officials have even run because no serious candidate actually tries to win any national office at all.
No ones gonna fund a party no ones voting for. Not to mention they get federal funding money if they reach a certain vote threshold, a threshold we can hit to fix those problems you speak of. The numbers of voters are there, but if you like the duopoly just say that but you’re not gonna make third parties viable by voting for the two parties that benefit from there not being large third parties. If you don’t want third party choices to be viable sure what you say makes sense, but you cannot keep voting for the same thing and expect a different outcome. Its either stop supporting the duopoly or resign yourself to voting for a duopoly candidate for the ret of your life.
if they didn’t hit the threshold in 2020 they’ll never hit it. If they had any desire to actually govern they would have put more effort into their candidates too. Jill Stein was less qualified to be President than Trump, and that’s saying a lot. She literally wasn’t qualified enough to run a medium size organization. It was a complete joke how she went around and agreed with every crackpot far-left conspiracy theory in her town halls because she couldn’t risk either upsetting any voter or possibly crossing her questionable Russian backing. Not saying she was a Russian plant, I think she was much more a useful idiot than anything. Gary Johnson didn’t know so many basic facts that he should have known it was clear he just ran to keep his name out there. We see this time and time again. Nader was the last genuine one to run and even he figured out he was accomplishing the opposite of what he wanted to eventually.
Wow it almost seems like the only people who can afford to run third party are those who have financial wealth from somewhere other than the party they represent and therefore have ulterior motives. Shocking, I wonder if there’s some way to get them public funding so they could get better candidates and smoother organizations.
Are you advocating that people or groups who have done basically nothing should get federal funding to run for President? Sounds like a great grift.
Im suggesting challenging them so they have a reason to not be such shitty parties. Are you suggesting the current system is not a grift? May I direct you attention to Trumps PPP loans, or even Biden not restoring the taxes the wealthy pay to what they were in the Obama era, effectively sitting at a compromise between Trump and Obama. Since HW Bush its been R, D, R, D over and over and yet we keep ratcheting further right in this country. If that’s fine with you just say so, but I advocate for anything that challenges that because it’s not like we have all the time in the world to let the problem work itself out, we’re literally on an environmental timer and every vote for the duopoly just guarantees no challenges to the powers that maintain that destruction are challenged. More republicans would lose votes over this than democrats too according to the polls in this very article, so they are very thankful for people like you ensuring that the only choice for people who dont vote democrat is them.
Now ask those people what the third party’s platform should be.
If only the politicians in the dominant parties had any incentive to make elections fair for all parties. As it stands, the dominant parties have too many systems in place to give themselves advantages.
Rank choice voting seems like an obvious upgrade to our current voting system but is nowhere to be found other than a couple states.
A third party would be an improvement. But, really, parties are the problem.
Careful. Heavily promoted Libertarian and Green candidates coupled with a relatively unpalatable Democrat is how we got Trump.
As long as the US sticks to it’s long outdated and undemocratic FPTP voting model, you won’t see a relevant third party in congress.
If any of you actually want to work towards a solution to this look into Forward Party. Forward Party is trying to make third parties actually viable through ranked-choice voting and open, nonpartisan primaries. Once states move past First Past the Post voting, it will actually be possible to vote for third parties without acting as a spoiler.
Not left, or right, but forward! It’s a scam, mate. Same as no labels.
Feel free to dismiss any new idea with baseless name calling if you want.
Unlike Forward Party, No Labels is actually funded and made up of mainstream US politicians and interest groups. No Labels is an establishment group pushed by right wing(republican) corporate interests. Forward Party is an outsider third party that is ignored by the established media outlets because they don’t control it.
The linked video assumes the left right spectrum is communism vs capitalism which is NOT how it is used in the US. In the US left is dems and right is repubs to the general population. That is the meaning of Forward’s Slogan in this context.
They are saying both of the democratic and republican parties are wrong and we need a different approach that does not conform to party lines. That is exactly what the OP shows.
I watched interview on mainstream media about the forward party. Yang refused to be nailed to any position, and wouldn’t say that maybe self-described Nazis shouldn’t have a place in his party. So, it wasn’t that the establishment is trying to hide it, they just aren’t a thing of any substance.
