604
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2023
604 points (98.2% liked)
politics
19145 readers
1665 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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- 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. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
While I don't hold out any hope for it, a splintering of one of the two parties would likely be a good thing regardless. We need more viable parties.
Well, the only way to get there is to fix the US voting and representation systems. FPTP has to go, and all important points in the US legislative need to have proper, democratic representation instead of this "Two Senators per state, regardless how many they represent". And while they are at it, make Gerrymandering impossible by removing the power to redrad the district maps at will. You will need an algorithmically method to draw district maps without any influence from race or political affiliation, simply based on the address of a person.
That will be a chance to stop the reduction of numbers of parties, as they suddenly get a voice for their concerns even when they "only" have e.g. 20% or just 5% of the voters. And this will also teach the parties the need to work together in a reliable way. Coalitions and stuff.
Look how other countries do it, learn what is good and what is bad with their voting systems, and implement the best solution that is acceptable.
That’s not how we’d get more parties with our voting system. If the GOP fractured because of this then there might be chaos for brief period of time, but sooner than later everything would get settled back to two parties. Our system is set up so that it just plain suboptimal to do otherwise.
That's what he's doing here. If Democrats calls on MAGA to unite with the GOP, they can't do it or it'll look like they're following the Dems lead, and they must disagree with Dems at all costs. So by simply stating the obvious path forward for the extremists, he's poisoning the well and making it more difficult for that to actually happen.
I would lay the blame at the feet of the extremists, not the person making a good suggestion.
Yes, but that will not please the idiots that form their base.
We wouldn't get more parties. I'm expecting eventually the Democrat party ends up in position as the right wing party and we get a "Progressive" party (or maybe some other name) as the new left wing party. It wouldn't be the first time this happens, but I don't know if it's actually possible with the way media works now and how hated the name of the Democrats is on the right.
The voting system is designed for tactical voting between two major parties. It can't support more. That needs to change. Maybe we could see that as things shift around though. Who knows?