Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Back to Here and Now: How to kill the DnR(s) -- stop voting for them.
If we wish to move beyond DnR(s) -- we need to stop voting for them.
Yes. I do not understand this. As I mentioned in another post, both these parties are basically the same. They instill hatred between the two groups (dems and reps) so that their emotions get in the way of recognizing the true enemy: the government currently in power whether it be a Democrat or Republican in office.
I wish their supporters would recognize this. Once that happens (which I doubt) two things need to happen: first is like you mentioned, everyone needs to stop voting Democrat and Republican. Next thing is that a worthy candidate needs to be out there. I submit that if there is no other good candidate, then everyone should just not vote, or write someone in.
I wish people would stop choosing the lesser of two evils (whatever that is in their minds, though like I said they're basically the same large party, out for power for themselves and their cronies who put them in office. If people will only wake up and realize that the Federal United States government, no matter if it is in Democratic or Republican power does not care a whit about the people of the United States), though I am guilty of this in the past. I just wish there was more of a movement for this. That people will wake up and realize one day that whether they vote Democrat or Republican, you are doing no good for the citizens of this country and all that person will do is lie to you and cheat the people.
I'd like to see a true Independent or Constitution party; however, our current system is so entrenched with big $$, that the 'little guy' (who could likely win if the could get on the ballot) doesn't stand a chance. That said, though, on my 'universal' ballot this year, I have like 30 choices for the presidential vote! Good grief. I've never heard of any of these people. So, I guess as Philip suggests, we simply need to stop voting for the D and Rs......but people are afraid to do that I think. They generally seem to chose the devil they know over the devil they don't know.
It's awful. I would vote for a viable 3rd party candidate.
I believe I already noted upthread that I think the best shot at reform is a change to Ranked Choice Voting, coupled with a switch from single member to multi member congressional districts.
I grew up under such a system, and while not perfect (no system is), it gives the smaller guys a fighting chance, thus broader representation, plus it sharpens not just inter party competition but intra party also.
NYC will become the largest district to adopt it in 2021. It was used in four D primaries in 2020. 80-90 countries use it in one form or another. It's been around since 1850, so it's been well tested. The idea that it "would never work here" is, as they say in my hometown.
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,464,896 times
Reputation: 12187
Once the USA gets universal health care and the same level of workers rights and environmental protection as the rest of the First World you could see the Democrats split. Right now moderates and Wokes can ignore differences and fight for those things. Once we get those things the Wokes will want to push towards hard core Marxism while the modereates will be content with things as they are. GOP has a united but shrinking base, right now maybe 40% of the national population.
Once the USA gets universal health care and the same level of workers rights and environmental protection as the rest of the First World you could see the Democrats split.
The Corporate D(s) (Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schumer, etc.) are ALL against those, as those would harm their Corporate Sponsors.
You do not have to worry about the D(s) splitting as the D(s) will be the ones to block them.
The R(s) are not enemy of the Left (or whatever you might like to call this) -- the Corporate D(s) are.
Until term limit is implemented, there will be no 3rd party to the 2 parties system as the D & R control the "choices". They both work together to make sure any potential threat is being removed. They keep telling us vote for the lesser of 2 evils. Don't waste your vote on 3rd party.
Then there is the lie. There is no consequence when politician lies. Until we the people wake up and hold them accountable, there will be no chance. Not only the politicians, hold the media accountable too.
One path to breaking the stranglehold of the two parties is ranked voting.
Massive fail, because ranked voting does no solve the underlying problem, which is, has always been, and will continue to be campaign funding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by unseengundam
Which makes me think is the United States destined to be stuck with the same two parties for the next 100 years or more?
Yes, because the only way to resolve the issue to enact meaningful campaign finance reform that removes money from politics, restores sovereignty to the States, levels the playing field to allow more qualified candidates to run for political office at all levels of government, allows for the growth of 3rd Parties, and increases citizen involvement.
This is all you need (and, yes, this Amendment will overturn Citizens United)
Proposed 28th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution Section 1
No person or entity shall contribute money, or goods, services, tangible property or intangible property in lieu of money, to a political candidate, or to the political campaign of a ballot initiative, who is not a natural born or naturalized United States citizen, and who is not legally domiciled and eligible to vote within the geographical area that an elected official serves or represents, or in which a ballot initiative may be operative. Section 2
Political parties shall not transfer or distribute campaign funds or monies raised, donated or accumulated within a State to another State or to the several States. Section 3
Any person who knowingly or willfully accepts money, goods, services, tangible property or intangible property for purposes of circumventing Section 1 of this Amendment shall be imprisoned for not less than 1 year and fined not less than 300 percent of the amount of money, or goods, services, tangible property, or intangible property, contributed to the political candidate or the political campaign of a ballot initiative.
Any natural person who knowingly or willfully commits a violation of this Amendment shall be imprisoned for not less than 5 years and fined not less than 300 percent of the amount of money, or goods, services, tangible property, or intangible property, contributed to the political candidate or the political campaign of a ballot initiative.
Any non-natural person or entity who knowingly or willfully commits a violation of this Amendment shall be placed in receivership for a term of not less than 7 years, and not more than 10 years, and fined not less than 500 percent of the amount of money, or goods, services, tangible property, or intangible property, contributed to the political candidate or the political campaign of a ballot initiative. The United States Bankruptcy Court having jurisdiction over the non-natural person or entity shall appoint a receiver to act as trustee Section 4
The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. Section 5
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date its submission.
Massive fail, because ranked voting does no solve the underlying problem, which is, has always been, and will continue to be campaign funding.
Wrong, campaign finance reform is a separate*issue that requires a separate*solution, because*it's not the only problem facing the political system. You're trying to put a square peg in a round hole.
Who is promoting your amendment?*
Has anyone agreed to introduce it in Congress?
I'd like to see a true Independent or Constitution party; however, our current system is so entrenched with big $$, that the 'little guy' (who could likely win if the could get on the ballot) doesn't stand a chance.
Which is exactly why you need meaningful campaign finance reform,
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Very Man Himself
Wrong, campaign finance reform is a separate*issue that requires a separate*solution, because*it's not the only problem facing the political system.
It is the only problem and the source of all other problems.
Vote-ranking does not support Independents and 3rd Parties, but meaningful campaign finance reform will give you Independents and 3rd Parties.
What's the point in vote-ranking Democrats and Republicans?
That's like trying to decide whether solid excrement or runny excrement is better.
Americans need choices. Vote-ranking doesn't do that, but meaningful campaign finance reform will.
Ask yourself why someone needs to raise $1.4 Million to get a job that pays $60,000/year.
Which is exactly why you need meaningful campaign finance reform,
It is the only problem and the source of all other problems.
Vote-ranking does not support Independents and 3rd Parties, but meaningful campaign finance reform will give you Independents and 3rd Parties.
What's the point in vote-ranking Democrats and Republicans?
That's like trying to decide whether solid excrement or runny excrement is better.
Americans need choices. Vote-ranking doesn't do that, but meaningful campaign finance reform will.
Ask yourself why someone needs to raise $1.4 Million to get a job that pays $60,000/year.
I'm not arguing that campaign finance reform is a bad thing. Just that it alone will not solve all the problems.
So, how would campaign finance reform solve the Electoral College issue? Or the relatively poor turnout (by international standards) issue? Gridlock in the Senate?
Politics is a substitute for civil war, but politicians and voters now treat it like war. How will finance reform change that?
RCV can go a long way toward elevating third parties and independents.
There are many different forms of RCV, with and without proportional representation, with and without a single transferable vote. with and without vote number quotas. There's a big political world out there.
The US first past the post system is the least suitable system for the most diverse country in the world. For one thing it allows politicians to choose their voters. In the US, the number of incumbents who get re-elected is astonishingly high.
Instead have multi member congressional districts like at the state level, where politicians have to compete not just with other parties, but also within their own party. Instead of having two major party candidates + the small guys, competing for the plurality of votes in a one seat 700K district, have 6 major party candidates + the small guys compete for three seats in a 2.1M district, using something other than the first three past the post system.
The Founding Fathers didn't get everything right.
I don't think you're going to like this, currently congressional salaries are $174,000 or more, not $60,000.
Members also get expenses allowances in excess of $1M per year.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
