3 ms·

> If the US had an equivalent of lib dems and/or proportional representation and/or ranked choice, would it still be so polarised I don't think this would be a

by tharne 4y ago

> If the US had an equivalent of lib dems and/or proportional representation and/or ranked choice, would it still be so polarised I don't think this would be a panacea, but it would definitely help things quite a bit. The largest voting block in the U.S. isn't Democrats or Republicans, but voters that have chosen not to be affiliated with either party.

0xcde4c3db 4y ago
There are plenty of voters who are registered independent/unaffiliated, but most of them still lean strongly toward one of the major parties. The number of consistent swing/split voters is much smaller. Most analysis/commentary I've seen says that partisan differences in turnout are a much bigger factor in winning elections than appealing to the center.
- JamesBarney 4y ago
  > Most analysis/commentary I've seen says that partisan differences in turnout are a much bigger factor in winning elections than appealing to the center. I've heard a lot of people say this, I've never seen any good data on this. Every analysis I've seen that compared how moderate and more extreme candidates did compared to the president consistently showed the moderates did better than the extreme. I'd be curious to see your analysis/commentary that shows the opposite.
  - 0xcde4c3db 4y ago
    I shouldn't have phrased it as "appealing to the center", but rather something like "appealing to true independents" or "appealing to swing voters". There is significant ideological breadth within the parties, and it's clear that appealing to more center-leaning voters can be a winning strategy, but that's less because there's a big chunk of the electorate composed of nonpartisan centrists and more because the most extreme candidates also tend to polarize and demotivate parts of their own party coalition while unifying and motivating the opposing party. Swing voters are far from nonexistent, it's just that their numbers are small compared to partisan (again: not necessarily registered party-affiliated) voters unless you define "swing voter" incredibly broadly [1]. Capturing their votes is clearly good for a campaign, but only if it can be in a way that is also sensitive to their partisan voters. [1] https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/just-how-many-swing-voters-are-there/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/just-how-many-swing-vot...
- tharne 4y ago
  > There are plenty of voters who are registered independent/unaffiliated, but most of them still lean strongly toward one of the major parties Just because a person consistently votes for one party does not mean they like that party or agree with its platform. In many cases, they consistently vote for the same party because they see it as the least worst option.
  - kodyo 4y ago
    Or they vote in self defense because the other gang intends to behave in a way they find depraved. It’s gross.

by tharne 4y ago

0xcde4c3db 4y ago

There are plenty of voters who are registered independent/unaffiliated, but most of them still lean strongly toward one of the major parties. The number of consistent swing/split voters is much smaller. Most analysis/commentary I've seen says that partisan differences in turnout are a much bigger factor in winning elections than appealing to the center.

JamesBarney 4y ago
> Most analysis/commentary I've seen says that partisan differences in turnout are a much bigger factor in winning elections than appealing to the center. I've heard a lot of people say this, I've never seen any good data on this. Every analysis I've seen that compared how moderate and more extreme candidates did compared to the president consistently showed the moderates did better than the extreme. I'd be curious to see your analysis/commentary that shows the opposite.
- 0xcde4c3db 4y ago
  I shouldn't have phrased it as "appealing to the center", but rather something like "appealing to true independents" or "appealing to swing voters". There is significant ideological breadth within the parties, and it's clear that appealing to more center-leaning voters can be a winning strategy, but that's less because there's a big chunk of the electorate composed of nonpartisan centrists and more because the most extreme candidates also tend to polarize and demotivate parts of their own party coalition while unifying and motivating the opposing party. Swing voters are far from nonexistent, it's just that their numbers are small compared to partisan (again: not necessarily registered party-affiliated) voters unless you define "swing voter" incredibly broadly [1]. Capturing their votes is clearly good for a campaign, but only if it can be in a way that is also sensitive to their partisan voters. [1] https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/just-how-many-swing-voters-are-there/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/just-how-many-swing-vot...
tharne 4y ago
> There are plenty of voters who are registered independent/unaffiliated, but most of them still lean strongly toward one of the major parties Just because a person consistently votes for one party does not mean they like that party or agree with its platform. In many cases, they consistently vote for the same party because they see it as the least worst option.
- kodyo 4y ago
  Or they vote in self defense because the other gang intends to behave in a way they find depraved. It’s gross.