4 ms·
The problems in the US are systemic. There will be no significant change without abolishing the two party system.
by ploden 10mo ago
The problems in the US are systemic. There will be no significant change without abolishing the two party system.
- criddell 10mo agoA lot of people are worried we will soon effectively have a one-party system.
- c-linkage 10mo agoToo late. Its those with money versus those without money. And those without don't count. And if you work for a living, you don't have money.
- hulitu 10mo agoYou have a 1 party system with 2 fractions. There really is not so much difference between democrats and republicans.
- vkou 10mo agoPretty sure there's a pretty big friggin difference between [Democrats/Romney and Bush republicans] and [MAGA republicans]. The former are nearly indistinguishable between eachother. The latter are something entirely different, and have purged all the non-crazy from their party.
- MaxfordAndSons 10mo agoCounterpoint: The problems in the US are systemic. There will be no significant change without abolishing unlimited corporate campaign donations.
- barbazoo 10mo agoPlus the separation of powers seems too reliant on the president being a decent human being. It'll be interesting to see that play out over the next decades.
- vunderba 10mo agoAgreed. I feel like the Supreme Court abandoned any semblance of critical thinking during the Citizens United v. FEC decision.
- vkou 10mo agoBe careful what you wish for. It's most likely that the only replacement for a two-party system the US will get... Will be a one-party system. Because there is no legal pathway[1] towards solving the conditions that create the two party system, but there are many illegal offramps that will get rid of one of those parties. --- [1] There are way too many obstacles, and the bar for consensus is too high to legally have these reforms. The bar is much lower for having them illegally - all you need is a single-party trifecta - lead by the kinds of people who'd start a coup rather than relinquish power.
- TulliusCicero 10mo agoThat's true at the federal level, but it's possible to get past the two party system at the local or state level where there's allowance for voter initiatives. Portland's new city council setup, with four districts and three representatives each based on ranked choice voting, is a step in that direction.
- vkou 10mo agoOnce this problem is 'solved' at the federal level, what makes you think the feds won't similarly solve it at lower levels.
- TulliusCicero 10mo agoNot sure what you mean by 'solved' here.
- nickthegreek 10mo agoWhile breaking the 2 party system seems unimaginable, I do feel like rank choice voting can do a lot to get us on a better path in the short/medium term.
- websiteapi 10mo agoI don’t know people are so hung up on ranked choice. Approval voting is simpler to explain, doesn’t require changing ballots and can be implemented immediately. Not to mention empirically results in more moderate candidates.
- ClayShentrup 10mo agoyeah. https://asitoughttobemagazine.com/2010/07/18/score-voting/ https://asitoughttobemagazine.com/2010/07/18/score-voting/
- ClayShentrup 10mo agonope. you need approval voting. https://asitoughttobemagazine.com/2010/07/18/score-voting/ https://asitoughttobemagazine.com/2010/07/18/score-voting/
- RickJWagner 10mo agoThe problems with the US are less than the problems in the countries where the flood of wishful immigrants are coming from. The fences on many countries are to keep people in. For the US, it is to keep people out.