3 ms·
There is no practical path towards these, though, given the political climate. People in general intertwine their political affiliation with their personal ide
by cle 10y ago
There is no practical path towards these, though, given the political climate. People in general intertwine their political affiliation with their personal identity and self-worth--good luck trying to get them to abandon it. And there are no incentives for politicians either, they similarly benefit from the predictability and clear demarcation of polarization (vote predictability makes legislation easier to whip, gerrymandering is easier, etc.).
- bluejekyll 10y agoI wonder about that... If you look at each individual district, I'd agree with you. If you look at it more generally though, there would be a case for the Republicans wanting to push this in CA (where they are almost non-players at the state level at this point), and similarly the Democrats pushing for it in Texas. Given this, there is an argument for both parties wanting this so that they could potentially have more power in areas where they do not now...
- komali2 10y agoThis is politics. Nothing is "practical" except what you are willing to do. A man got on TV and said "I could shoot supporters in the street and still get votes," then was elected president. You can do literally anything. Saying "it's impractical" is just you getting in your own way.
- cle 10y agoThat's nonsense, he was elected President because enough of the right people voted for him. He could very easily have done things to piss them off and then would not have been elected President. Just because his election didn't fit in with your mental model of how politics works, doesn't mean that it didn't fit in to any model. It did, it just wasn't yours.
- notmarkus 10y agoIsn't the obvious conclusion that one could say the exact same thing to you? Just because it doesn't fit your model of practicality...