4 ms·

> I don't think New York can do it until the people get tired of watching the decay and the current political machine gets voted out. We're tired of it, but Ne

> I don't think New York can do it until the people get tired of watching the decay and the current political machine gets voted out. We're tired of it, but New York government is not a democracy. The two ruling parties have passed an complex network of laws which, in effect, mean that officials are accountable only to the political party, not to their constituents. Case in point: one of the largest advocates of eliminating business service was Silver (a Democrat), despite the fact that his constituents were almost entirely dependent on bus service. When he was finally convicted of corruption, people were shocked - not shocked that he was corrupt (everyone knew - it was completely conducted in the open), but shocked that he was actually going to be held accountable to it. Unfortunately, the conviction was overturned on appeal due to a technicality - a law had been passed which narrowed the definition of corruption, meaning that the things he was convicted for were no longer criminal offenses. We can't vote them out when there's literally no one to vote in, and both the Democrats and the Republicans have a gentleman's agreement not to compete with each other seriously, the same way Comcast and Time Warner Cable do. New York is literally the most corrupt state government in the country[0]. Nothing short of a series of multiple federal court rulings will change that, because both parties benefit from it, and neither has the incentive to change it. [0] http://www.politifact.com/new-york/statements/2016/sep/19/elaine-phillips/new-york-has-been-most-corrupt-state-decades/ http://www.politifact.com/new-york/statements/2016/sep/19/el...

Danihan 9y ago
>We can't vote them out when there's literally no one to vote in, and both the Democrats and the Republicans have a gentleman's agreement not to compete with each other seriously, the same way Comcast and Time Warner Cable do. And people wonder why Trump got elected. Pervasive desperation for anyone who might actually shake up the system.
- jsjohnst 9y ago
  > And people wonder why Trump got elected. Except he lost by something like 8:1 in NYC. Why? Because the folks in NYC knew he was as crooked or worse as the swamp he claimed he would drain.
passwordqq2 9y ago
Schneider man is busy taking down la drumpf so why worry about state government?
neuromantik8086 9y ago
A lot of the reason I remain living in New York is because of fusion voting. It makes me feel as though it would be much easier to switch to a third party without totally breaking with the established parties. Unfortunately, third parties in NYS have yet to grow a spine and endorse their own candidates, primarily because if they don't get enough votes in the elections they cease to exist (i.e., why Working Families endorsed Cuomo instead of Teachout last gubernatorial election).
- chimeracoder 9y ago
  > A lot of the reason I remain living in New York is because of fusion voting. Fusion voting is actually one of the exact mechanisms that the two dominant parties use to ensure that third-parties remain completely non-viable. As you point out, fusion voting means that third parties have a stronger incentive to endorse one of the Democratic or Republican candidates instead of running their own, because it ensures their right to ballot access. > primarily because if they don't get enough votes in the elections they cease to exist (i.e., why Working Families endorsed Cuomo instead of Teachout last gubernatorial election). It's a little more complicated than that. Cuomo promised the Working Families Party that, if they endorsed him, he'd push for a particular piece of policy that they'd wanted. After they endorsed him, he then started the "Women's Equality Party"[0], which also endorsed Cuomo, in a direct attempt to split the vote from the Working Families Party. His goal was to drive the Working Families Party vote under 50,000[1], which would have denied them ballot access in future elections, so that he wouldn't have to worry about their influence or endorsement in the future. Fusion voting is an embarassment to democracy. It's "hilarious" when you show up to the ballot box, and the same candidate is running unopposed on three party lines: as a Democrat, a Republican, and an Independence party candidate[2]. [0] led by himself and his family, run mostly by men. [1] Don't quote me on the number, but I think that's the threshold [2] For those who aren't from New York: yes, this is sadly pretty common. Though more often than that, only one party even bothers to front a candidate in the race in the first place, so the general election is a series of uncontested elections, with each candidate running on only one party.

Danihan 9y ago

>We can't vote them out when there's literally no one to vote in, and both the Democrats and the Republicans have a gentleman's agreement not to compete with each other seriously, the same way Comcast and Time Warner Cable do. And people wonder why Trump got elected. Pervasive desperation for anyone who might actually shake up the system.

jsjohnst 9y ago
> And people wonder why Trump got elected. Except he lost by something like 8:1 in NYC. Why? Because the folks in NYC knew he was as crooked or worse as the swamp he claimed he would drain.

passwordqq2 9y ago

Schneider man is busy taking down la drumpf so why worry about state government?

neuromantik8086 9y ago

A lot of the reason I remain living in New York is because of fusion voting. It makes me feel as though it would be much easier to switch to a third party without totally breaking with the established parties. Unfortunately, third parties in NYS have yet to grow a spine and endorse their own candidates, primarily because if they don't get enough votes in the elections they cease to exist (i.e., why Working Families endorsed Cuomo instead of Teachout last gubernatorial election).

chimeracoder 9y ago
> A lot of the reason I remain living in New York is because of fusion voting. Fusion voting is actually one of the exact mechanisms that the two dominant parties use to ensure that third-parties remain completely non-viable. As you point out, fusion voting means that third parties have a stronger incentive to endorse one of the Democratic or Republican candidates instead of running their own, because it ensures their right to ballot access. > primarily because if they don't get enough votes in the elections they cease to exist (i.e., why Working Families endorsed Cuomo instead of Teachout last gubernatorial election). It's a little more complicated than that. Cuomo promised the Working Families Party that, if they endorsed him, he'd push for a particular piece of policy that they'd wanted. After they endorsed him, he then started the "Women's Equality Party"[0], which also endorsed Cuomo, in a direct attempt to split the vote from the Working Families Party. His goal was to drive the Working Families Party vote under 50,000[1], which would have denied them ballot access in future elections, so that he wouldn't have to worry about their influence or endorsement in the future. Fusion voting is an embarassment to democracy. It's "hilarious" when you show up to the ballot box, and the same candidate is running unopposed on three party lines: as a Democrat, a Republican, and an Independence party candidate[2]. [0] led by himself and his family, run mostly by men. [1] Don't quote me on the number, but I think that's the threshold [2] For those who aren't from New York: yes, this is sadly pretty common. Though more often than that, only one party even bothers to front a candidate in the race in the first place, so the general election is a series of uncontested elections, with each candidate running on only one party.