3 ms·

This isn't strictly true. Parties definitely care about motivating their base and arguably the stay-at-home vote has pushed the US away from visible centrism in

by jprete 2y ago

This isn't strictly true. Parties definitely care about motivating their base and arguably the stay-at-home vote has pushed the US away from visible centrism in Presidential candidates.

rcxdude 2y ago
I would suggest that this kind of thing is contributing to the problem as opposed to solving it, even as someone who is not particularly near the center.
- _heimdall 2y ago
  A drop in voter participation creates an opportunity for an alternative party to fill the void. That market opportunity simply wouldn't exist if always accept that we have to eat whatever crap the two major parties decide to serve us.
  - amanaplanacanal 2y ago
    How low do you think participation would have to be for another party to step in?
    - _heimdall 2y ago
      I really don't know, it would depend on a lot if factors. More important to me though is that I think it's st least a possibility in that scenario, as long as a vast majority of voters believe they only have two options we won't have a third party step in.
  - rcxdude 2y ago
    If the two main parties were to drift well away from the opinion of the voters, and the voters all picked the closer option of the two, then one party would become dominant, the other irrelevant, and then there would be an option for an alternative party to fill the void closer to the voters. Note that this would be the case in any other voting system as well: whatever your preferred party is only gets to power at the expense of one of the others. The main reason this doesn't happen often is that the politics of those parties tends to shift to try to win those votes. (IMO, the sad fact of most democracies nowadays is that the government does in fact tend to reasonably well represent the average of what the voters want, in terms of method if not results. Given the state of them, I think it reflects poorly on the voters, but there's not really any better way to align government and populace)

by jprete 2y ago

This isn't strictly true. Parties definitely care about motivating their base and arguably the stay-at-home vote has pushed the US away from visible centrism in Presidential candidates.

rcxdude 2y ago

I would suggest that this kind of thing is contributing to the problem as opposed to solving it, even as someone who is not particularly near the center.

_heimdall 2y ago
A drop in voter participation creates an opportunity for an alternative party to fill the void. That market opportunity simply wouldn't exist if always accept that we have to eat whatever crap the two major parties decide to serve us.
- amanaplanacanal 2y ago
  How low do you think participation would have to be for another party to step in?
  - _heimdall 2y ago
    I really don't know, it would depend on a lot if factors. More important to me though is that I think it's st least a possibility in that scenario, as long as a vast majority of voters believe they only have two options we won't have a third party step in.
- rcxdude 2y ago
  If the two main parties were to drift well away from the opinion of the voters, and the voters all picked the closer option of the two, then one party would become dominant, the other irrelevant, and then there would be an option for an alternative party to fill the void closer to the voters. Note that this would be the case in any other voting system as well: whatever your preferred party is only gets to power at the expense of one of the others. The main reason this doesn't happen often is that the politics of those parties tends to shift to try to win those votes. (IMO, the sad fact of most democracies nowadays is that the government does in fact tend to reasonably well represent the average of what the voters want, in terms of method if not results. Given the state of them, I think it reflects poorly on the voters, but there's not really any better way to align government and populace)