Lanhdanan
138680
7171
366
Oct 25, 2020 10:47 AM
Lanhdanan
138680
7171
366
Afterlife666
Damn fucking right...out with the electrol collage, Gerry mandering and voter suppression.
PangolinBan
For a Republican, sure. For an actual conservative, arguably not so much. Republicans need to become conservatives in practice again.
IG1Fields
Republicans: If we’re not in control and can’t mandate everything we want - it’s unfair! Buckle up Repubs, it’s gonna be a bumpy ride.
ballsoutflyer
It would be nice to see a full dem administration... but i'm not holding my breath.
Sulanis
No Republicans did it to themselves, by being selfish assholes and forgot about democracy.
Dailywitchery
When Obama came in they had the house and the senate. Big whoop it did. They bailed out the banks. The veil was lifted for me then.
Thispostisaboutacat
OH NO, YOU MEAN VOTING RIGHTS INSTEAD OF VOTING SUPPRESSION!’?!!!!!!? CLUTCH THOSE PEARLS
Knightendae
To me what Trump and his laid drinkers say Dems will do, is actually what they are doing. So if they win they're going to rig it.
skellington01
Projection as always. Blame the dems of what they are doing right now.
BlairT1
By making it harder to FUCKING CHEAT. Fuck all these Republican assholes...
KawaNyx
Remember to vote for the person not the party. The next Trump may be an articulate Democrat.
DriftingSol
THIS.
HezekiahSturdy
Not a chance. Trump got no where as a democrat.
Radver
Can they just kill the 2 party system all together? I dont fully agree with either side. There are more choices than meatloaf or tofu.
TheDogEnd
Republicans, always projecting. Of course they fear Democrats trying to structurally rig the system; that's what *they're* trying to do!!
jcombs1
cepheidvariable
Isn't that... kind of what they're doing now? They're restructuring the country so it'll be hard for a Democrat to get elected President.
Smacketywack
They’re undermining the voice and the will of the people.
slurrybarffast
getotterhere
positiveleroy
If the gop loses senate and the White House, there will be a culling from the left and they will take no prisoners. They should be scared.
AMercer
Ban gerrymandering, take down barriers that prevent some people from voting, set up services to make it easier to vote, get all to vote.
AMercer
These are the things the Republicans fear because the more people in the US vote the harder it is for them to win.
sciencebasedlifeform
Maybe just move election day to Saturday instead of a fuckin Tuesday....people gotta work yo
Remmon1
Or declare election day a national holiday. Either solution works fine.
DressUpForNothing
America NEEDS sweeping structural reforms to bring things back to parity. If you feel you can’t get elected fairly then... that’s just that.
DonaldTwain
what? this is EXACTLY what you’ve been doing for the past 20 years you fucking asshole.
DonaldTwain
only highlight of moving to SC so far had been the opportunity to vote against this fucker.
FlyingButtPliers
RANKED CHOICE VOTING https://www.fairvote.org/rcv You will never have a 3rd party without it. After removing trump it's my top priority.
exponant
Absolutely. Many people don't even know that there are other parties.
shlogan
I suspect as soon at Texas turns blue youll find a ton of Republicans who suddenly know what "winner takes all" is and think it needs to end
Danteet
The good news is that might be fairly soon. Been conservative my whole life. This election cycle has me voting straight dem from now on.
Danteet
And a lot of people I know are doing the same. We’re sick of these shitty people ruining our nation and acting like they endorse religion.
shlogan
I hope you're right. Live in a red state and people admit he's garbage, but "doesn't matter, abortions are down".
NOYLL
I hope so, but they've been predicting Texas will turn blue for ages now, and it still hasn't come to fruition
SaveitforQueenDoppelpoppolus
keep going lindsay: “it’ll be hard for an R to be elected president or control congress while losing the popular vote like we do now”
xj4low
And everytime he is on tv now he is asking for money and giving his website address over and over. Wants to know where opponent money came
xj4low
from. Not just your state, but from the other 49 that see him as a fraud with no spine or morals.
Evenmorehorrifying
Already lost popular vote twice, but no, do go on Lindsay, about why we still have the electoral college...
LuckyMan9
Yes, let's replace the insufficient 2 party system with a great, glorious and MORAL 1 party system. This can't go wrong.
parabolic000
Popular vote, or even electoral college without voter suppression equals a D victory. Maybe they should find a better platform.
TheLatCzar
Exactly.
renaissanceredhead
Exactly, you Keebler Elf lookin motherfucker...
bekindtoanimals
LOLOL!
Keifer6644
Best diss ever
YouMayFindThisMildlyInteresting
I thought that was Sessions?
renaissanceredhead
Dude, there's more than one elf baking cookies in that damn tree...
TheEvenPrez
Can we please get a multiparty system and term limits already
delecti
Term limits needs to be one of the last steps in major reform, or the lobbyists will be the only ones who know how to game the system.
only90skidswillgetthis
Term limits make it easy for the interests behind the politicians
TheEvenPrez
Please explain? From my viewpoint having to reset the field ever 2-8 years mean lobbyist effectively have to renegotiate contracts at least
only90skidswillgetthis
Lobbyists have more time, interest, and resources, for controlling every person through that revolving door
only90skidswillgetthis
And candidates are no longer concerned about reelection but instead their lives after their term, eg jobs from lobbyists
TheEvenPrez
Those make sense and are valid concerns, thank you for articulating them my friend
Stargrave3000
Not unless you want to rewrite the constitution, no.
pancakesplz
You don't have to rewrite it, just amend it .. which we have done a lot.
Stargrave3000
To get a working multiparty system would require throwing the entire electoral system out the window. It's not gonna happen.
TheEvenPrez
Generally, threats to a republic warrant a revision or two
IWasToldThereWasCake
Can we just get away from a two party system?
Remmon1
Of course. Do away with party primaries and instead have a ranked choice instant run-off voting system.
Imjusthereforthecomments
Ranked choice voting.
manulofdoom
Get rid of this electoral college and voting district shittery.
MacClay
Sort of, but it will probably become a one party system (unless the Dems split somehow) and then the primaries will be a lot more important.
IWasToldThereWasCake
I would think that the GOP would split up in smaller factions. Having a super conservative party and then a moderate middle ground party
MacClay
Probably, but then they would each have less of a chance of defeating a unified Democratic party, wouldn't they? I mean the whole reason we
MacClay
call it a Two Party system is because out of a dozen-ish parties, only two matter. Fragmenting the lesser wouldn't make that number go up.
IWasToldThereWasCake
Right, but also having the e DNC split up into smaller factions as well - like the UK or Australia
LizardEnterprises
Sure. Switch voting systems. Nothing else will do it
Schitzoflink
"structurally change" aka remove all the fuckery the GOP has done to suppress voters.
JustAnotherRandomCommenter
they're just trying to scare the never-trump republicans into voting for him anyway.
qixx23
Are democrats the only voters affected? Wouldnt "voter" suppression cause less votes in general? How does it help just them? Serious questi
GoPro8guy
The electoral collage is fundamentally flawed
liftmoar
The electoral college has been what kept the country together.
GoPro8guy
https://youtu.be/7wC42HgLA4k
Arcania85
Just make it mandetory to vote... Solved
trdfrgsn
The Republican Party is split and fucked going forward. Need a kook on their ticket to get the crazy supporters to vote with them.
Seanspeed
They're really not that split as of right now. But if they try and go away from Trumpian far right rhetoric, they will become split.
CityYeti
And help rich over the poor
Dissipo
I've always felt the loser of the presidential race should become vice president, in hopes it'll force collaboration between the two parties
chengsta
like ID requirement? even homeless lazy fucks have ID's. I'm black, and I don't know ANYONE, even lazy hobos, that don't have an ID.
HaydukeLivesGoddamnit
Your wallet gets stolen and you’re homeless, which address do you put on your application for a new ID? Next.
SomeDetroitGuy
You put in where you stay, be it a street corner or a shelter or under a bridge or a tent city. Making sure homeless people have IDs is a
SomeDetroitGuy
critical and necessary part of reintegration into society. You need an ID for a job, for an apartment, for a bank account, for just about
SomeDetroitGuy
anything in our society.
TimbitsAreDonutHoles
Nah more like "hey let's strategically have fewer polling places around populous areas and black neighborhoods"
ItsMorphinTimeIdiot
What does being black have to do with anything? Weird statement
bloodtaker3
Obvious troll is Obvious
jrntn
Starting out your case by calling the homless "lazy fucks" pretty much guarantees you that your argument gets thrown in the "shithead" pile
7hatsBollocks
Gerrymandering ya nugget!
chengsta
democrats do it too. you just don't hear about it because the lefty media suppresses it, like they do the biden molestation videos.
7hatsBollocks
Maryland is the main one. Compared to 8+ conservative states. Let's fix it nationally and see who it helps more!
swellguy18
Ooookkk, I can now see none of us owe you a good faith argument. Stop buying into conspiracy you wet sock.
AHDaniHodd
lol. Get off Facebook and QAnon dude
tegfdd77
theoshadowfang
You know, I remember a time when across the board black people were regarded as lazy for not doing well compared to privileged white people
PastureofMuppets
Its is a way to personally blame the people who have been severely harmed by policy, to pretend the policy isn't harmful.
theoshadowfang
it obviously shouldn't be that way, but it felt poignant to mention.
swellguy18
That attitude still isn't gone. It's just suppressed in those who know it isn't received well now.
theoshadowfang
Well, it was that way, but then Trump started empowering them.
TatersWhatsTatersPrecious
And by structurally change to make it harder for Republicans they mean stuff like the voting rights act.
StapMeVittles
Undoing the unfair shit we did..... NOT FAIR!! Wah, wah, wah.
silentboltai
More like total control with socialism, communismcommunism
Madalchemist2018
Summon the bondulance
xenocrisis0153
When all 3 turn Blue, it's time to end "meeting in the middle." GOP plays dirty... time to let them know we don't stand for this anymore.
drunkbs
I hope Feinstein got a really good talking to about the bullshit she pulled at the Barrett hearing. They need to balls up and take charge.
KrisPhoenix
or getting rid of gerrymandering...
Multipew
Maybe they'll have to move to a platform of doing things that improve the lives of the majority of people, instead of just the rich.
78Hamster
Hey Putin has been voted in properly... I'm mean Trump. I keep mixing them up.
heywoodjabme
Bizarre that rather than change policies to and gain the support of the people they focus on getting out their vote and minimizing others.
EatinButtsAndBustinNuts
This has baffled me for so long. Instead of making things better and garnering the support of most everyone, stick to one group.
cliffjumper83
Probably more like gerrymandering. The old ways work best
orbitn
Markamanic
IIRC some GOP shill once literally said on TV "If voting was easy, republicans would never win an election"
DrzBa42
And removing the Republicans’ gerrymandering tactics. Every accusation a confession with the Republicans.
Vamp13
Less gerrymandering. SpOoKy.
assmaster4000
Shit hot mate.
BabySharkEtc
kelseysaurusrex
And create independent redistricting committees so they can't gerrymander the shit out of their states and win with minority votes
Thatsagoodbid
Supreme Court ruled no challenges to gerrymandered maps due to political parties in the courts. Challenges are okay on racial, etc grounds.
kelseysaurusrex
I mean a minority of votes, not support of minority voters
ConfederacyOfDunces
We've been trying to do this in texas for YEARS but can't get it past our gerrymandered government.
dojustice
Michigan did it by getting enough signatures for a ballot proposal. Maybe Texas has an option like that?
ConfederacyOfDunces
Here's a great summary of our history on this if you're interested:
AShartInTheWind
I feel like including people in the process wouldn't solve the problem. It needs to be a law that districts will be determined by square--
AShartInTheWind
-mileage or geopolitical features. Take all decision out of it.
kelseysaurusrex
That would be even better!
RiverHawk
That's a bit problematic cause each representative in a state represents the same amount of people. Relying on mileage or geopolitical
xeno426
A program that creates districts of equal population based on recent census data, with random shapes but which favors few extrusions.
PXEVonKossa
Structural changes would be adding two states to change the senate, adding seats to the Supreme Court, and changing the 25th amendment
ToolmanTR
If you have to suppress voters in order to get elected...you shouldn't be elected.
ToolmanTR
37 states added since inception. Supreme court should totally be larger. And "amendment" by definition is meant to be changed.
PXEVonKossa
Everyone is so worried about Trump that they can’t see that Democrats are about to actually attack the three pillars of our democracy
TheRealArclight
hey look everyone a shitty troll account.....
corvidaeopus
How would adding Puerto Rico and Guam as states attack our democracy?
PXEVonKossa
We should probably add the state of Jefferson as well then... just start systemically changing stuff. Do you think that is a good idea too?
PXEVonKossa
Puerto Ricans have voted multiple times that they don’t want to be a state. Now that they are trouble they may change their minds.
SnailsAgainstTungstenSpheres
shawnemack
Yeah, fair elections will make it harder for republicans to get elected. Maybe they should ask themselves why that is.
gwydd
I think you're being rhetorical, but just in case: they already know. Ezra Klein did a podcast about their antidemocracy.
JustaDick
From an indoctrinated perspective, it's because the other side cater to idiots and masses, appealing to their prejudices and base desires.
JustaDick
When you break it down. Pretty much the same argument is used by both sides, and they're both wrong. They both over simplify their opponent.
JhericFury
They know. That's why they do it
SuperIncoherentRantingMan
Why do you think they care? They're openly supporting foreign interference and would eliminate elections completely if they could.
NotTheSharpestSpoonInTheDrawer
A theif doesn't ask themselves why people lock their doors, they know they're there to rob you.
dmjalund
because it will allow the 'wrong' people to vote
xenocrisis0153
I'm legit surprised that FL has a ballot amendment to allow "everyone" to vote. I didn't look into who they are referring to, but yeah, ok.
xenocrisis0153
https://allvotersvote.org/about/ ... I'm still lost, but it sounds good, no?
LiquidHandSoap
I doubt that Republicans have the ability to self-reflect.
icommentwithsteveharvey
But obama or hillary something something
FSMPirate
Buttery mails!
rowm
Butter emails
mtloech
nikkinikorasu
kindpanda
Yeah maybe they could move their platform back to center-right
nikkinikorasu
So, you mean they'd be the same as democrats?
tyrfin
So still extreme right by global standards
MrKnut
iynque
Indeed “harder for ‘Republicans’” is referring to the current white nationalists. A conservative with decency shouldn’t have a problem.
cdelta
A conservative with decency... is that not the sort of politician the Democrats have settled on?
iynque
But even the principled conservatives of old are now mostly extremists and conspiracy theorists. Trump moved them all to radicalism.
JustaDick
There's a lot of us "principled conservatives" that want the Republican party back from the Cheeto and his goon squad.
UnfilteredRecord
Mostly, but not exclusively. And once Trump no longer has control of the base, they will run to distance themselves from him.
nivE3066
Maybe get rid of electoral college
banz111
Maybe instead of upending how America works, figure out what the *actua* problem is. Clearly the Electoral College worked for a while.
Gosuamakenatek
Funny how the right doesn't think you deserve basic healthcare but they deserve a whole system rigged in their favor to keep them afloat.
adjacentengels
The electoral college would be far less of an issue if they didn't assign votes all or nothing. That's the real problem.
Callynd
Not true. The Electoral College is not granular enough to split electoral votes like that and have it be fair.
Callynd
If someone wins Wyoming with 50% + 1, they get double the EVs. The Electoral College is terrible all around.
xenocrisis0153
Unfortunately it can only be dismantled if ALL 50 states agree. Better idea is to rid the "winner-takes-all" aspect some states do.
TyrannosaursInF14s
Right, or the two-party-system.
C4b3rjo4
You aren't gonna change the two-party system through passing laws. You have to convince the people your party is better then the other 2.
kingkongkeom
Let's be honest, the Reps party is deeply divided, they should split in two. I'm sure there is division in the Dems party as well, do the
kingkongkeom
same. That's already 4 parties. Then the independents can form their parties, get a green party or whatever etc. Implement proportional
C4b3rjo4
or however many there are/will be.
TheMaestro66
Ranked-choice voting would go a long way toward allowing a third party to be competitive
Troxarn
I understand that you make that assumption but it is not true. The system in america is first-past-the-post and some other countries use 1/?
only90skidswillgetthis
Yeah sure just have all those small states ratify a constitutional amendment taking away their disproportionate power. Go ahead I'll wait
boogiemanspud
SOME issues make sense for small states to have more representation. Farming and similar shouldn’t be decided by cities.
only90skidswillgetthis
Um electoral college delegates don't have anything to do with how farmers farm.
tidepool
Why would a president bother to keep their interests in mind if their votes no longer mattered at all?
ThePastmaster
There is another way to go about it. A bunch of states have signed an agreement that who wins the popular vote gets all the electors. 1/2
Vectron
Why all? If a state has 11 electors and it's say 52/48 votes, wouldn't a 6/5 split would make more sense? FPTP just seems unfair.
only90skidswillgetthis
If all the good states send electors as popular vote ratio and all the bad states send FPTP the bad wins
ThePastmaster
So they're trying to get rid of it by making it obsolete instead of trying to get it disbanded. 2/2
mrmayortheiv
All the electors from their own states? That might fix the issue of faithless electors, but it doesn't change the fact that a voter from a
RevolutionOnHerLips
For fairness wouldn't a percentage split of electoral votes be better representative rather than winner take all? If the split is 51% vs 49%
RevolutionOnHerLips
you end up with nearly half a state being unhappy with their electoral college. I realize it doesn't fix the vote weighting but it seems
only90skidswillgetthis
Would get interesting when signed states actually have enough electors total but what binds them to their decision in a pickle?
elasticsuite
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact
ShutTheFrontDoors
The problem with this is that the US needs a new party.Basically having no choice because the Democrats always win easily is not good either
fnoigy
Correct
MeowWoof
So remember 10 years ago when Republicans split into the Sane Wealthy Party and the Tea Party, and now all the Sane ones have left? Same
MeowWoof
thing will happen now to the Democrats with Progressives and Conservative Democrats.
thoushaltnotpass
3 parties with a winner-take-everything approach seems even more dangerous that what you have today. Makes it easier for extremists to win.
MeowWoof
The main problem is the small third party ends up being the swing vote on every decision, giving all the real power to even fewer people
3Davideo
TheGrayBox
The Democratic Party can be whatever it’s members want it to be. It can be more left, people just have to vote for the more left candidates
ThePakistallion
They’ll get that now. The republicans parry is splintered as its now the Trump party....
Radix865
They should break up the parties, like let the extremes on both sides have their own and see if they get voted...
DukeDarkwood
As @DarkHourse says, it's not that we need "a new party", but that we need to change how voting works SO THAT less-known parties can rise.
TinyBadger101
Agree, but Dems will split if they always win, into Dems and Progressives. Then you have center-right and center-left parties again.
Dagordae
If the Democrats always easily win then the Republicans need to figure out why the majority of people are against them. Simple as that.
channelranger
I'd prefer the rep. party die out, and the dems split into their neoliberal and progressive halves.
ObliqueRay
The video version of why you'll never get more than two parties with the current system https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo
DVSBSTrD
Yeah, why should the best choice win? It's so unfair.
TheWombatStrikesAgain
If the Republican party dies, the Dems will probably split up, into corporate whores and social democrats or something.
OlderWiser
You people have no idea how many times one party or the other has been declared dead. Then the surviving one pisses everybody off.
TheWombatStrikesAgain
Given how divided the country has been for the last decades, ANY party would piss off a considerable part of the people.
ArcaneConjecture
There can be no 3rd parties until we change to ranked-choice voting.
heyletsbefriends
that is complete nonsense.
allthis4nothing
And take the money out of the candidate runs so we don’t keep getting rich people. No more attack ads, as well.
talldean
Having a blue collar labor party would be, well, nice.
strategy400
Sure throw your vote away. The Republicans will love it.
CuttleFishOfCthulu
Theres SEVERAL parties. Presidential ballot had about 20 candidates from different parties.
TheGrayBox
There were only four presidential tickets on my ballot, one of which had no party defined.
ShutTheFrontDoors
Viable, competitive parties.
pancakesplz
That's on the people in said party, no ?
TanithRosenbaum
Not if the voting system disfavors small parties
pancakesplz
It's up to those politicians to win the people over.
wellladeedaa
Our capitalistic approach won't allow it. Smaller parties cannot financially compete and eventually absorbed just like in business
wellladeedaa
It's like small businesses. They're currently allowed to exist by huge corporations because the threat they pose isn't worth addressing
wellladeedaa
But if walmart really wanted to crush all you little main street stores or wanted to buy them all out, they could in 90% of america
ImNotReallyADoctor
Unfortunately the stigma right now is that Americans think voting outside of Republican or Democrat is a wasted vote
cardboardunderwear
It's because the elections are winner-takes-all and not proportional or ranked. So it's a mathematical reality that a 3rd party vote is 1/2
Leithoa
Voting your conscience is never a waste.
cardboardunderwear
2/2 a vote for someone who has no chance at a win. A 3rd party vote still makes a statement though.
robustdumbass3000
True, though one reason no one knows or really looks to other parties is a refusal to debate others.
cardboardunderwear
That part of it too. 3rd parties have trouble getting on ballots and into debates.
robustdumbass3000
Libertarians are on every state ballot
KartFnocker
if the dems were easily winning for a while the GOP would have to change their policies to appeal to more people, which seems good
greyblob
Agreed. They aren't stupid
KartFnocker
I'm supportive of viable 3rd parties too, but the 2 party system would adapt eventually as well
SteveTheEgg
3 party doesn't, you need at least 5 to really draw votes out.
WizeGuyThoughts
If the GOP doesnt change their policies, then they'll fade, after which the Democratic party will break up into its smaller sub-parties
TheWombatStrikesAgain
Problem is, they have kinda painted themselves into a corner. To appeal to more people, they'd have to cut loose some of their craziest (1)
TheWombatStrikesAgain
allies, like evangelicals, white nationalists, hardcore libertarians, etc. Then they'd have to compete with the Dems for new voters. (2)
KartFnocker
yep, which is why they're doubling and tripling down on voter suppression instead of trying to actually have good policy
Thorbane
Or they'd just disappear. It's happened before, resulted in the opposing Democrat-Republican party splitting.
HerbalTeaEnemas
Wasn't one of them called something else before?
pancakesplz
Same names, just the current republican party started with the dixie democrats leaving en masse
ShutTheFrontDoors
Makes sense. Of course I am all for stopping voter suppression in all forms, I’m just concerned about how long that “eventually” would take.
CoBr2
8 years max. They'd figure out which candidates would win in congress then build party platforms based on what works.
sadsquatch
It would become “regular” Dems vs “progressive” Dems for a while
Sasurau
DarkHourse
USA probably needs preferential voting (ranked voting) before multiple parties become viable. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting
AMPLIFIEDFootsteps5IntenseMusic
thewastelands
Bingo. I was going to make this comment. Ranked choice would allow more than two parties that split the nation.
Leithoa
2)I don't know what the solution is. Ranked voting is nice, undoing citizens united would help, but there will always be some level of
Leithoa
Multi-party systems don't really solve the problem. You still have 'left' & 'right' but now it's semi-flexible coalitions of parties
AMPLIFIEDFootsteps5IntenseMusic
Washington himself said the death of democracy would be if there were only 2 parties due to a deadlock, so......
Leithoa
He also owned slaves & lived 200 years ago.
Leithoa
3)business in politics.
ChainmailleAddict
Seriously, ranked-choice voting seems amazing with no downsides. Why aren't we doing it?!
YouHaveNoodsAndIHaveAnInbox
It would make it harder for special interest groups like billionaires to buy the election.
TavisMcNamara
It wasn't really something they thought of in 1776 and conservatives have been trying to prevent it since.
DukeDarkwood
"Amazing with no downsides" is a downside for people who don't want to play fair.
Leithoa
You're forgetting the golden rule: 'He who has the gold makes the rules'
Orinnisalreadytaken
It would destroy the 2 party system and neither of the 2 parties wants to give up power and reduce the odds that they keep power.
Awkwardyogini
Isn't it great being the free-est country in the world?!?! Our voices really matter! (/S just in case)
onlyhalfghost
Your government doesn't and hasn't for 60+ years represented the population. They don't plan on starting now.
smax410
Our republic wasn’t set up for a multiparty system. The EC never functions how it was intended and was made obsolete in the Information 1/2
QuasiIntellectualChimpanzee
It’s our whole system. It’s designed to placate the southern aristocratic slave owners. It promised their minority rule wouldn’t be 1/
QuasiIntellectualChimpanzee
threatened. Once you realize that, everything else falls into place. 2/2
smax410
Mhmm not originally but that’s what it became
ArcaneConjecture
That's why we have to change the setup. We must start with Ranked Choice voting for the House and Senate. That's the beginning.
smax410
Age. Until the EC is gone, a 3rd party will never be successful. Also, the only 3rd parties with a modicum of a following only put up 2/3
TheNarwhalicornsDick
Libertarians in my state are really good at running for local government! The changes are small but I can see it happening
BearsDontCare
EC only applies to the executive branch. Ranked voting could occr on a state level
smax410
candidates in presidential election years. If the Green Party ran a serious candidate in my house or state race in a mid term I’d take 3/4
smax410
Then a lot more seriously 4/4
trikucian
That's the problem with the American green party. At least the Canadian green party goes for seats at he municipal, provincial and frederal
DukeDarkwood
The problem's one of funding. The DNC and RNC fund their candidates' campaigns quite easily. 3P candidates have a harder time matching the
allthenamesaregone
It SHOULD be hard for a republican to get elected, because fundamentally they benefit the few at the cost of the many.
FuzzyBear
Hey you talking about the UK Conservative party? or the Republicans in USA.... seems could be either...
FrozenInCarbonite
cfbshank36
Yep. And I see no issue, if it’s difficult to get elected then change so people want to elect you. You serve all the American people.....
cfbshank36
....not just your friends. I mean really GOP, fix your shit so people will actually WANT to vote for you.
InTheDistanceAPlaintiveEnglishHorn
That's it. It has been said.
Quylein
73 people Downvoted this because they don't know what real life and facts are. Must be nice to live in an illusion
Spiderbubble
They couldn't win in a normal election, so yeah, fuck em.
[deleted]
[deleted]
boogiemanspud
I seriously hope you just forget the /S. If not, as a white dude fuck you.
ArcaneConjecture
Republicans basically did that when they gutted the Voting Rights Act.
Grimmrog
sadly you have the oppsitie situation right now.
thedadwhobeatshiskidwithjumpercables
1/Well that’s not exactly how it will work. If structural changes are made republicans will be forced to change their platform to something
thedadwhobeatshiskidwithjumpercables
That can be competitive in the new system which will probably be conservative but an improvement over their current platform
pareidoliaperson
You people should take a look at Middle East and how their minority far right have come to power and fucked the entire region.
Khalgrom
What do you mean “you people”?!?!?
pareidoliaperson
I'm not sure what this comes off as. But what I mean is nationalism and far right is a virus in many countries.
Khalgrom
Thank you for you clarification, and I agree. However, this was sarcasm. Sorry for the lack of /s
pareidoliaperson
US. The West in general.
DocWino
Any of you look at your 401k recently?
reverendbonobo
Mine has grown almost as fast as the Covid death toll. The more people die, the richer I get! Is that what it feels like to be a Republican?
Dasher0ni
Have you looked at food bank lines recently?
xenocrisis0153
My 401k only matters when I want to retire. For the next 30 years, it's just a number in an account.
certainlynotaserialkiller
boy, are you going to be pissed when you find out about the electorial college.
smax410
I lol’d
sanaujiram
“But it protects the small states! Without it states like California and New York would have too much power” -my mom and grandparents
pizzapartyhard
I wanna say something like 20 red states added together have the same population as California. Each state gets 2 senators. And guess who
pizzapartyhard
confirms the SCOTUS. Not Congress as a whole, just the Senate.
thingamagick
I'm not a republican, but you live in (somewhat of) a democracy. If a republican wins fairly then they should be president.
Sh4dowWalker96
Theoretically, yes. The problem is that republicans don't play fair.
ChainmailleAddict
If they win fairly I'm all for it. But everyone should be able to easily vote, EVERYONE, and they've been trying to stop that.
SomeDetroitGuy
No one is arguing against that. They are saying that if a Republican wins UNFAIRLY then they shouldn't be President.
uninterestingman
Thing of it is though, they've gerrymandered the shit out of otherwise purple states and they play dirty when they have even a slim majority
tidepool
Gerrymandering doesn’t affect the presidential race, it applies more to the house and local governments.
Madalchemist2018
Once again for hopefully the last time. Voter turnout and ease of voting can be affected at the district level or county level. 1/
Madalchemist2018
If you press on the undesirable districts while enabling the ones you want the overall state total can be affected.
ChainmailleAddict
Legit! Republicans with a Democrat Majority: "I'm too weak" Republicans with a Republican Majority: "UNLIMITED POWER!"
GrandProtectorDark
They haven't won fairly in a long time
Acrage
Well no shit. A republican hasnt won the whitehouse fairly in over a decade though...
chengsta
even though biden just admitted organizing and running the biggest voter fraud in history?
theoshadowfang
You seem pretty fucking stupid.
abazoe
What
neureaucrat
Shocking that you didn't include a source on that very wild and unlikely claim.
bloodtaker3
Obvious troll is Obvious
SnowpersonHitInTheFaceWithALackOfCreativity
O rly
JohnnyUtahFBI
What the actual fuck are you talking about
ArcaneConjecture
Source?
trapperjohnmd
Arguably once in the last 30 years...and that was Bush JRs 2nd term with the country in full on blind patriotism following 9/11.
cardboardunderwear
Country was knee deep in iraq at that time. 51 percent voted Bush. 48 percent Kerry. Hardly blind patriotism.
nicelyvillainous
Don’t forget that bush lost the 2000 election, an independent recount of the votes was done by media found that gore would have won if they
nicelyvillainous
Fixed all the votes with hanging chads, where the machine did not punch the hole completely but a choice was clearly indicated. Also,
cardboardunderwear
There have been two presidential elections in the last decade. A republican won one of those. So you're talking about one election fwiw
Acrage
You must've missed when I put "fairly"
cardboardunderwear
You must have missed my point that a decade(!) isn't very many presidential elections. It's 2 in fact. And only one was won by a republican
TheLatCzar
Won the same way any other President has. Seems fair to me.
Metallica93
Correction: it should be hard because they are not the majority. It really should just be as simple as that.
hotroddadbod
Any party that people don’t generally like should have a hard time
Metallica93
Instead, they've won presidential elections twice in the past 20 years while not being the majority.
Ditches
Correction there shouldnt even be political parties vote for who you want to. Theres no majority only us as citizens. The two parties divide
Metallica93
That's all fine and dandy, but you're not getting your political utopia voting Republicans in. Vote blue, then tweak the system.
Ditches
Agreed. The system is fucked i personally and i think just about everyone else, feels that the electoral college is outdate and useless.
cardboardunderwear
Dems aren't a majority either. They are plurality. And even then barely with more independents leaning that way. Your point stands I think
kindpanda
Yeah there are more Dems than repubs but neither is a majority
IDidItForTheSlunk
They are a majority in that there are more Democrats than there are members of any other political party in the US.
cardboardunderwear
That's not how the term majority is defined.
OhNoDontTouch
majority is simply defined as "the greater number" but the word is used differently when talking about the House/Senate & a "majority vote"
allthenamesaregone
Sorry that's a difference between the US and NZ where I live. Here we don't identify as a member of the party, so can change who we support.
IHaveBeenConfusedForACyberTerrorist
Nunyabeez74
Sounds nice
cardboardunderwear
You can support anyone you want in the US also. The issue there is many states have closed primaries so in those states 1/?
cardboardunderwear
2/ you have to declare which party you support before the primary. But you can declare whichever you want and you..
cardboardunderwear
3/ aren't required to vote that way in the main election.
SonderingStrike
As a Brit, a lot of us do feel loyalty to one party, but I myself vote for who ever most closely matches my views.
OtterOfDoom
Isn't loyalty to a party why you all are arguing over whether or not kids should get food?
kevinallover
As Americans we register as a party member so we can vote in party primaries to hopefully shift the party to nominate candidates that >
kevinallover
> represent our views.
ProfessorPoopyButthole
And that's the problem. Loyalty to a party is what got us Trump in office.
atmcashmoney
Trump became a republican in order to get elected but it has more to do with him being a “businessman” not a politician that got him in
juicynibbler
Eh, Mcdonald dump closely matches the views of >40% of this country. I live in trump country and many eat this guys shit up like he's poopin
TheStrongValkyrja
Loyalty to a party is what divided this nation. (Both sides.) This is the worst I've ever seen it.
saxon2060
Absolutely the same. I definitely favour left of centre but I look at the manifesto highlights of all every time. I absolutely don't >>
saxon2060
understand the "I'm a republican but I'm voting for Biden!" Unless you literally join a party, voting a certain way doesn't make you >>