8 ms·
Wouldn't it be amazing if we had a viable third party? I can dream, can't I?
by nazgulsenpai 2y ago
Wouldn't it be amazing if we had a viable third party? I can dream, can't I?
- dtquad 2y agoNumber of parties don't determine ideological span. For example the 14 political parties in the Danish parliament all support Ukraine.
- jacooper 2y agoThat's one issue of many. You vote for the party which maches your ideas and opinions on many issues, not only one.
- slothtrop 2y agoThe other interesting thing about Denmark is that most parties are similar on immigration. Across the pond it's likened to a Social Democracy, but it's also a high-trust society with low crime rates.
- skinkestek 2y agoThat hasn't always been the case though, has it?
- slothtrop 2y agoWhich part? The country is over 80% ethnic Danish, so I imagine some aspect of that has been consistent a long time.
- skinkestek 2y agoI mean, what is now the new Danish immigration policy was considered racist by every mainstream party until a fee years ago, wasn't it?
- unethical_ban 2y agoIrrelevant. In this country, there is large ideological span. And allowing new parties a chance to succeed allows old, co-opted ones to die.
- runeks 2y agoAgreed. And preferably a fourth, fifth and sixth as well.
- lobsterthief 2y agoRanked choice voting is the only path to this.
- clolege 2y agoHave you not heard about approval voting? Or do you not see it as another path to multi party elections?
- unethical_ban 2y agoApproval voting would be better than what we have now, but I think ranked choice is easier for people to understand. I think putting preferences is more comforting to people than the idea of approving people equally if you have preference.
- MetaWhirledPeas 2y ago> I think ranked choice is easier for people to understand I strongly disagree. "Vote for one or more candidates" is even easier to explain than "sort all these candidates in the order of your preference". And once you start trying to explain the potential adverse effects there's no contest. Approval voting today, tomorrow, forever.
- buzzy_hacker 2y agoProportional representation is more important than RCV vs approval voting for single-winner elections. And, in the US, multi-winner RCV (single transferable vote) is the most viable approach to achieve that.
- unethical_ban 2y ago
- magaaaa 2y agoRFK Jr tried, the dems shut it down.
- JansjoFromIkea 2y agoRalph Nader is a better reference point for the dems shutting down the possibility of a third party candidate
- frank_nitti 2y agoNader is the kind of leader we need, but don’t deserve. Dems employed some similar strategies with Sanders in 2016, despite his decision to run as a Democrat. It is interesting to look at the intersection of positions held by the likes of Ralph Nader and Ron Paul, especially where they differ from their respective “most aligned” mainstream party platforms, where they are marginalized. The most prevalent of these are the Military and Prison Industrial Complexes, and in my anecdotal experience 98% of the people agree regardless of their socio-economic status
- frmersdog 2y agoYou're thinking of Ross Perot.
- JansjoFromIkea 2y agoI'm not, Ross Perot played a big part in getting Clinton elected so it'd be weird for them to take issue with him. More recently the democrats blamed 2000 on Nader running third party on the assumption that all of his votes would've gone to Gore otherwise.
- frmersdog 2y agoYou're right, I misread. I meant to allude to the fact that Perot's run was really the only viable 3rd party campaign in recent history. Nader got about 2% of the popular vote, Perot got ten times that, at about 20%. Candidates looking to replicate or even one-up his success need to, likewise, circumvent traditional media gatekeepers to get in front of voters constantly, incessantly.
- JansjoFromIkea 2y agoYou'd need proportional representation or something like the French system or you wind up with very skewed results for example the UK's most recent election had the following - one party has 410/650 of the seats in government with a third of the popular vote - they gained 211 seats from the previous election off the back of a 1.5% swing in the popular vote - another party has 65/650 of seats with 12% of the vote, another has 5/650 seats with 14.5% of the vote
- IncreasePosts 2y agoRunoff voting or something similar would work too. Tons of people don't vote for their preferred 3rd party because they realistically want to help their slightly-aligned major party defeat their not-aligned other major party.
- manmal 2y agoThat reminds me a lot of South Park episode 8 of season 8.
- paldepind2 2y ago> You'd need proportional representation or something like the French system or you wind up with very skewed results Is the French system a good example of a multi-party system? It currently seems to be struggling with handling three parties and it doesn't guarantee proportional representation. The presidential election is a winner-takes-all system and in the election for the Assemblée Nationale each constituency is a winner-takes-all.
- unbrice 2y ago> Is the French system a good example of a multi-party system? I would say yes in the sense a new party can (and did) emerge and rise to power when there is demand. Even before that you had some healthy rise and fall of political parties and political alternance beyond just two main contenders. > It currently seems to be struggling with handling three parties There are like 6 parties with more than 10% of seats, the current government is a coalition of five parties (from two main "families") and no shutdowns or hung parliament. > Doesn't guarantee proportional representation That however is true, and by design. This is a property the french voting system share with eg: ranked choice and other systems that aim at resolving the compromise as part of the election rather than afterwards. I don't mean to say that the french voting system is perfect (I quite like ranked choice), simply that it is a functioning one with interesting properties.
- kobalsky 2y agoyou need a different voting method first, either ballotage or any of the other systems that don't destroy parties with overlapping voters
- randomdata 2y agoIs the destruction a problem? When a viable third-party rises up, you will again return to a two party system, that is true. But it will be with the new party that you want, not the old party that wasn't cutting it.
- result2vino 2y agoYou’re kinda implying that Old Party is essentially bad in a way that New Party won’t become. That’s not how things work at all. A party is just a collection of people. They don’t go away. The system that got them there doesn’t go away. I feel like a broken record, but God, Americans need only look beyond their own borders for just a SECOND to see real-world examples of almost every other ‘hypothetical’ posed by all the armchair political scientists in this thread.
- randomdata 2y agoKind of implying in a tongue in cheek way to point out the absurdity of focusing on political parties. Political parties are literally labour unions by another name. You wouldn't hire a worker at your day job based on their labour union affiliation, so why the hell are you concerned about the union a worker in your government business is affiliated with? Dumbest thing imaginable. Just hire people based on their capability to do the job.
- unethical_ban 2y agoRanked choice solves the vote splitting issue.
- MetaWhirledPeas 2y agoRanked Choice is an improvement, but please research Approval Voting. Simpler and better.
- markus_zhang 2y agoI have always thought that it would be interesting to see an "Ordinary people party" that focuses on the silent majority, held by someone who never wants to be the president but loves to hold a percentage as a bargaining chip.
- maxehmookau 2y ago> I have always thought that it would be interesting to see an "Ordinary people party" that focuses on the silent majority There is no silent majority. Turnout was >60% in 2020, so by that measure there's a silent minority at best.
- markus_zhang 2y agoYeah, I was about to write "But looks like Trump kinda does that", but thought that could be a bit controversial so I didn't.
- odo1242 2y agoSilent as in public discussion, not votes, I think.
- umeshunni 2y ago> an "Ordinary people party" Hate to break it to you, but that's the GOP at this point.
- techfeathers 2y agoIs it? You couldn't really know until you split out the parties. One odd thing I find with the GOP right now is there seem to be a lot of people voting with the hope they won't actually do the things they said they'd do.
- techfeathers 2y agoIs it? You couldn't really know until you split out the parties. One odd thing I find with the GOP right now is there seem to be a lot of people voting with the hope they won't actually do the things they said they'd do. It feels like there are lots of people in the GOP who want to go a lot farther than "Ordinary people" do.
- mbesto 2y agoThe ONLY way this gets fixed is if ranked choice voting is put in place. But this also requires the people in power implement it. Good luck with that.
- Taikonerd 2y agoThe good news is, RCV is getting good traction at the city and state level. Actually it was on the ballot in several more places yesterday: [0] (I haven't seen which of those passed or failed yet.) [0]: https://fairvote.org/ballot-measures/ https://fairvote.org/ballot-measures/
- MetaWhirledPeas 2y agoApproval voting please. RCV is better than we have, but it makes zero sense next to approval voting.
- max51 2y agoI don't remember who said it, but I loved the idea of an extra option on the ballot for a redo. If it gets a big enough percentage, you redo the election with new candidates and the old ones can't be candidates ever again.
- ss64 2y agoThe problem with that is everyone might vote for it repeatedly, making more and more politicians ineligible. You could end up with 10 or 20 elections in one year and you wouldn't be able to repeal the rules without a government in place.
- amelius 2y agoNo because voters eventually get tired of it, because they want a functioning government.
- result2vino 2y agoAmericans will do anything to be different. Christ! This is worse than the…better voting systems that are already battle-tested by other countries.
- valval 2y agoAh yes, the most successful and long lasting democracy in recorded history is doing things wrong. We should ask all those EU countries that collect 60% effective tax rates and try to scrape by.
- leadingthenet 2y agoThe actual outcomes of those different voting systems is still a dominant US that is increasingly leaving the rest of the Western world behind. So maybe we should be learning from them?
- petesergeant 2y agoNo. For both France and Canada it’s hollowed out the middle, and both are facing upcoming elections between hard right and hard left as a result
- VancouverMan 2y agoCanada doesn't have any "hard right" party of note at the federal level. Today, the Conservative Party is a centre-left party. They support big government, taxation, immigration, interventionism, and other policies that are inherently not compatible with "right wing" ideologies. Comparing the Conservative Party's platform to that of the centrist People's Party makes the Conservative's centre-left positioning more obvious. Recently, the Conservative Party's platform has more closely resembled the farther-left Liberal Party's platform than it has the centrist People's Party platform.
- danbolt 2y agoI would think that the social policies of the federal Conservative Party place it in Centre-Right to Right. It’d be closer to what you mention if Peter MacKay or Erin O’Toole had no opposition in 2020. I understand that your political views might see the Tories as Centre-Left, but your pegging of the PPC as centrist strikes me as mischaracterizing the present federal landscape.
- zawaideh 2y agoCanada does not have a hard left party.. The NDP is at best social democratic which is centre left. Even the conservatives, while courting some hard right views, is arguably not that far right.. evne though I would put them firmly in the right wing.
- 8note 2y agoThe biggest issue facing Canada is that all of the parties support rising house prices. There's no variety, even under a multi-party system
- vecter 2y agoAs long as America has a first-past-the-post voting system, then game theory dictates that it will always be a two-party system.
- WorkerBee28474 2y agoCanada has FPTP and has 5 parties represented in parliament. Right now the governing party is a Liberal/NDP alliance, and it's possible that the next election will result in a Conservative government with a Bloc opposition.
- idunnoman1222 2y agoThe bloc only exist because Quebec is special. The NDP only exist because the liberals just pander and then do whatever they want once elected and everyone knows it. (and Canadians in the east are afraid to vote conservative federally because they are mostly a western thing)
- idunnoman1222 2y agoThe bloc only exist because Quebec is special. The NDP only exist because the liberals just pander and then do whatever they want once elected and everyone knows it. (and Canadians in the east are afraid to vote conservative federally because they are mostly a western thing) And greens having one seat is not anything real
- samsartor 2y agoUnfortunately first-past-the-post was on the ballot in a lot of states this year, and absolutely crushed ranked-choice: https://ballotpedia.org/Ranked-choice_voting_(RCV)#Ballot_measures https://ballotpedia.org/Ranked-choice_voting_(RCV)#Ballot_me... I live in Colorado and couldn't be more pissed off. We had a shot at viable 3rd parties and blew it.
- culi 2y agoAlaska might even repeal it's RCV. Mostly due to voter confusion blaming it for the reason Dems had some minor successes after it was adopted
- edm0nd 2y agoEven if a 3rd party got elected president, the Senate and the House are Republican/Democrat, they wouldnt be able to get anything passed and it would be largely useless. The entire system needs an overhaul.
- amelius 2y agoThe problem: more than 50% of people think the system works just fine.
- cryptonector 2y agoYou did. His name is RFK Jr.
- seanmcdirmid 2y ago[flagged]
- cryptonector 2y ago[flagged]
- seanmcdirmid 2y agoYour reply absolutely disgusts me even more. There is a lot of evidence that RFK is nuts. See: https://www.npr.org/2024/08/05/nx-s1-5063939/rfk-jr-central-park-bear-bicycle https://www.npr.org/2024/08/05/nx-s1-5063939/rfk-jr-central-... > The conspiracy theorist-turned-third-party candidate’s campaign has weathered a series of increasingly improbable-sounding scandals in recent months, from Kennedy’s admission that a worm ate part of his brain to his denial of reports that he once ate barbecued dog (he said it was a goat). > Kennedy just happened to have an old bike in his car, which he said someone had asked him to get rid of. He recalled that the city “had just put in the bike lanes” after a number of serious accidents, and decided to stage the bear in Central Park as if it had been hit by a bike. Never vote for crazy. Simple > This sort of discourse does not belong here. Shame on you. I'm sorry, it is obvious. Shame on you for not just reading the evidence and making a rash judgement that this guy would be fit to run the country. He makes Trump look like an actual very stable genius.
- cryptonector 2y agoI see zero evidence of mental illness in the linked article.
- TomK32 2y agoDon't you worry, even with the large number of parties in the Austrian Nationalrat, German Reichstag or even in the Dutch's Tweede Kamer you still have people who are unhappy with all of the parties.
- stoperaticless 2y agoThat’s a given. But by casting an actual vote for “green party”, you are not only electing green party, but you are also sending strong signal to other parties, that there is an active voter who cares for “green” ideas. (Other parties may opt to include some “green” green ideas into their campaign, or even schedule)
- scotty79 2y agoWe would have it if Republicans didn't bend their knee to Trump in 2016. We'd have Democrats, Trumpists and Republicans. But Republicans didn't want to become a third party so they let themselves get completely consumed by Trumpists in exchange for letting them keep the branding.
- jesseab 2y agoYou're not alone, friend. A three body problem would make for more interesting dynamics.
- Molitor5901 2y agoWhat needs to happen is that the American people need to RUN. Every single time. Take Colorado as an example: A third party candidate could get on the ballot for congress for as little as 1,500 signatures from registered voters. To change the two-party system will be like legalizing marijuana. City by city, state by state, all the way. The problem is that there's not much money in third party politics...
- calebm 2y agoAll magnets are dipoles.
- tunesmith 2y agoThird parties are a bad idea for American presidential elections, and here's why: The Electoral College + the Twelfth Amendment. The problem: The EC requires a majority, not just a plurality, of 270 EVs. If you bring in a competitive third party, the EVs get split three ways. If no one hits 270 EVs, the presidential election goes to the House. The House also requires a majority, not just a plurality, of state delegations. If you bring in a competitive third party into the house, the state delegations get split three ways. If no one hits 26 state delegations, the House just has to keep voting, and the Speaker of the House serves as President in the meantime. Structurally, as it is, the Republicans have a major advantage in state delegations, such that if no one reaches 270 EVs, the Republicans will pick the president. This is either a bug or a feature depending on perspective, but either way it's not friendly to a third party. The lack of solution: Ranked choice voting does not solve this. That just makes it more likely that third parties will screw up presidential elections. The NPVIC does not solve this, because our current Supreme Court would never let it take effect. A constitutional amendment will not overturn it because one of the two major parties has a structural reason to leave it in place. The Electoral College + the Twelfth Amendment are here to stay. There is no way around it.
- lovecg 2y agoI don’t think we can voting system engineer ourselves out of populism. European democracies are not doing so hot either.
- ibejoeb 2y agoI hear this all the time, but it's not like this is going to happen by prescription, quietly and cleanly and welcomed in. These are powerful factions that are not going to take it lying down. MAGA is the third party. Nobody ceded power to Trump. Both R and D tried really damn hard to get rid of him. His biggest detractors are GOP royalty. He got enough people behind him to get established. In his remarks following this election, he even referred to it as the MAGA Party.
- ergocoder 2y agoI am in a country with multi-parties. It doesn't feel better. It feels like tits for tats (e.g. trading politicians with special interests) and nothing gets done at all.