-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
ABC/Wash Post Poll: Trump, GOP, AND Democrats all suck
- Thread starter Schattenjäger
- Start date
- Status
It wouldn't be so bad if liberals could at least work together without attacking each other too but even that feels like a tall order.
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
Benji always doing God's work.
The reality is that Duverger's law suggests that we cannot have more than two dominant political parties at any given time in American politics, but the reality also is that these particular two parties have absolutely rigged the electoral and media system such that any kind of third party trying to get itself exposure has numerous hurdles beyond the purely natural ones that they have to clear.
Puck Beaverton
Banned
when have people ever liked facing the harsh truth?
we invented the afterlife because death scares us so much. We'll do anything to avoid having to face the real shit.
Schattenjäger
Gabriel Knight
Not at all
I think as the gap between the right and left continues to widen.... there will be room for a centrist party that takes the best of both parties and runs with it
.. made up of both moderate republicans and democrats
I think the best potential for a political shake-up would be extrapartisan political organizations which can endorse candidates who share their views and influence policy at least on a local level. This way, more radical groups can support candidates who might be rejected by the larger party apparatus, and also pressure the larger party apparatus to accept certain views.
Democratic Socialists of America has just begun doing this on a very small scale, having gotten a couple city council seats in the past month. While not being a political party in the traditional sense, the DSA can endorse candidates like a traditional political interest group as well as field its own candidates. It's only got 20,000 dues-paying members scattered across the US, but if the DSA continues to grow it may be able to support Democratic or independent candidates that the Democratic Party passes over, changing the calculus of local politics and creating a cadre of young people eager to participate local elections.
I'd expect similar groups to emerge in the next couple years to represent many other ideological interests.
The majority of polls have shown time and time again that while the generic democratic congressman and senator is generally unpopular, they are far more popular than the generic republican senator/congressman.
Asking whether someone is "out of touch" is misleading, because it not only elicits responses from other parties, but those from within their own party. A 3rd party would be similar. People in general aren't fans of a generic politician, but like their own representative and senators much more. It's the other ones that suck, not theirs!
It's far from as simple as saying "they all suck". That's a childish way of viewing polls like these, and it sucks that CNN is reporting it this way.
Asking whether someone is "out of touch" is misleading, because it not only elicits responses from other parties, but those from within their own party. A 3rd party would be similar. People in general aren't fans of a generic politician, but like their own representative and senators much more. It's the other ones that suck, not theirs!
It's far from as simple as saying "they all suck". That's a childish way of viewing polls like these, and it sucks that CNN is reporting it this way.
lmao
That's not going to happen anytime soon (at least on NeoGAF). It's gotten really bad since the election.
excelsiorlef
Member
But the only way you're ever going to win a Presidency as a third party is if you have enough folks in the House and Senate to give your guys the Presidency and the VP because even if you do win the only win you're gong to have inevitably is one where you don't get the required number of EC votes for the majority so it'll go to the House where whatever party controls it will pick their guy and whoever controls the Senate will pick their guy and ta-da if it ain't you mister or miss third party you won absolutely fuck all
PixelatedBookake
Junior Member
I think both parties would benefit from some restructuring. In the Republicans case, major restructuring. But tbh, since they saw the success of Trump, they probably try to follow that path of campaigning after Trump tries the same strategies he did in 2016 to try and get a second term and fail because (hopefully) America won't fall for the same thing twice.
Phrozenflame500
Member
While I'd love a multi-party USA, it won't happen since the electoral system is fundamentally structured in such a way that only two parties are really viable.
Regardless, I'm not surprised popular impressions of both parties are negative. The "political elite" narrative went wild this election and did a number on both parties.
Regardless, I'm not surprised popular impressions of both parties are negative. The "political elite" narrative went wild this election and did a number on both parties.
I'm not debating that. We are behind on most issues. We're too focused on military spending to catch up. What I'm saying, is that the average American is not college educated and are concerned about losing their job to automation and such. Republicans talking about "coal jobs' is a joke and everyone knows it. A candidate needs to rise that is for the working class and actually wants to help.
old manatee
Banned
It's hilarious how both parties demonize the far left for how fucked up everything is, even though the far left never actually gets their way.
Electric Eye
Banned
We don't need a 3rd party we need money out of politics. Money plus treating it like a sport is going to be the end of Democracy.
Campaigns create party leaders.
No, as the gap between right and left continues to widen, one of those parties will just snap over in the other one's direction.Schattenjäger;234559499 said:
Does it NEED to happen is the question? A lot of people will be screwed over in the next however many years. Just because. We don't need it.
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
Bloomberg should have run on the "abortions for some, miniature American flags for others" platform. Perhaps the only chance an independent candidate has had, however slim, was running as a contrast to the two most disliked presidential candidates in history.
benjipwns
Banned
It's not about winning the Presidency, it's about fucking ballot access and then hopefully winning down ballot to build towards winning up ballot.
Getting a Presidential candidate on the ballot and getting enough votes saves you tremendously as all your down ballot candidates no longer need to petition to be on it in most states.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sewer_Socialism
DontBeThatGuy
Member
You're not gonna impede automation, because a) America is capitalist as fuck, and b) those who "need" and "want" it have all the money and power to not give a shit what you want.
AstroNut325
Member
Who is the "We"? You and I? Yes. The major corporations? They need it for their bottom line. We've accepted it thus far. I don't see it changing any time soon.
We can't stop progress on automation, and we can't be bothered to think about a social safety net like UBI because the American public has been brainwashed by right wing BS.
I think third parties could be very, very beneficial to US politics, but they've got no business participating in general elections. Most existing third parties really only exist for the spectacle. If the Green Party cared about enacting meaningful change, they'd start from the bottom and spend their millions on local races.
By participating in municipal and state legislative politics, third parties can make their interests known in a big way and give themselves a solid institutional basis. Even if a third party is not big enough to win a federal election, they could ideally serve as a broker, demanding concessions from major-party candidates in exchange for an endorsement.
That extant third parties don't behave this way shows how farcical they all are.
excelsiorlef
Member
Ahh that makes more sense. Cheers.
It's not "just because". It's centuries old economic, cultural, political and social processes continuing alongside the development of technology.
A third wealthy New Yorker is really what we needed to shake up that race.
Ding ding ding
old manatee
Banned
Bloomberg is the perfect example of why there is no centrist party: he represents the worst of both worlds to both moderate Democrats and moderate Republicans.
No Lablez is stupid dumb bullshit largely comprised of Republicans (and a few Dems) sad that their brand of politics have completley fallen out of favor and they can't get their jobs back. Applauding moderates like Susan Collins for the sake of ~both sidez~ creates perverse political incentives.
It's true, though.
People hate congress. But they keep voting to send back their particular congressperson. What they dislike is always the other side's fault. Rinse, repeat.
No Lablez is stupid dumb bullshit largely comprised of Republicans (and a few Dems) sad that their brand of politics have completley fallen out of favor and they can't get their jobs back. Applauding moderates like Susan Collins for the sake of ~both sidez~ creates perverse political incentives.
It's true, though.
People hate congress. But they keep voting to send back their particular congressperson. What they dislike is always the other side's fault. Rinse, repeat.
Aaronology
Member
Aye.
And in lots of places all over the country the 2018 candidates that are being lined up are the same usual suspects because the Dems have learned nothing and assume that they're going to win without having to actually make any changes. The party deserves what it is going to get in 2018 but the American people don't.
Its self defeating. At my age and where I'm at in life, no I do not want it because I recognize my job can be automated. Then there is the argument of going to school like its not going to be ridiculously competitive in the future. Unemployment will reach stupid levels at some point. If someone campaigns on the narrative of trying to stop it.....then lights out and you know it. People want to keep their jobs and have job growth. For a lot of people that's all they care about hence the disconnect.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
I would love to see the number one reason cited for why people think Dems are out of touch. If it's "they are too liberal" would the whiners in this thread be cool with them moderating? I doubt it.
No one's stopping you, or any of the "American people," from running for political office. Do it. Seriously. That's the whole point of a Democracy.
"Stop automation and the jobs come back" is no different than running on "Illegals/China/etc. are taking your jobs." It's an easy solution to a difficult problem. We're not just going to turn back the clock 200 years and go back to an agrarian society. Recognizing the problem and providing a solution are two very different issues.
DontBeThatGuy
Member
Ah yes, so you're looking for another one of those "bring back the coal jobs" type of candidate, in order to be willingly duped?
Third parties in general elections would be perfectly fine and beneficial if the US did what every other sensible nation does and held open primaries prior to a run off.
It seems like if people like the OP can't rep the GOP proudly then they are more likely to go the both sides suck route instead of realistically looking at the situation and realizing there is only one party right now looking out for the best interest of the average American right now.
jack_package_200
Banned
"Cuz Identity Politics are why Trump won. Dems were not focused on real americans. People don't want money in politics so they literally chose a businessman to be president. "
Aaron Strife
Banned
We had what, 56% turnout last election? And it's drastically worse in midterms. That's pathetic. I understand there are some deliberate obstacles to voting, but the fundamental problem is that people don't care. The only way to solve this is by making voting compulsory or somehow making people care. I'm very skeptical as to the latter.
benjipwns
Banned
They wouldn't have those millions* and they wouldn't be on the ballot. Participating in general elections is the only way the parties can get anywhere, especially...you know...on the ballot.
*Jill Stein raised $3.5 million. Gary Johnson raised $11.4 million. Both of these shattered third party fundraising records for non-billionaire candidates. (In 2012 they raised $893,000 and $2.6 million respectively.) It was the first time in history that two third parties were on 44+ ballots.
Carly Fiorina spent $11.4 million to lose in Iowa and drop out of a primary. Bernie Sanders spent $181 million to lose his primary. Hillary Clinton spent $640 million to lose her general election. (Both had months where they spent over $26 million. More than twice what Johnson used over two entire years. Almost seven times what Stein spent over two years!)
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
As Benji pointed out, third parties run candidates at every single level of politics. People choose not to consider them.
DontBeThatGuy
Member
Voting needs to be made easier, and incredibly convenient everywhere in the U.S, but we certainly know why that's not happening.
She lost against Trump. I think it is obvious why some people would be hesitant to vote for her again.
No, we just need to make voting easier.
jack_package_200
Banned
Yep. GOP loses when turnout is good.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Seems the lesson there would be don't run Clinton again.
This is what kinda makes me want to run for something. Everyone in my family has run for office but me. And I know for a fact that I would work my ass off for the people.
But politics is so messy and it takes a certain mindset to withstand all of that. Dunno if I would wanna subject myself to all of that. I like my somewhat low profile
Election day isn't even a holiday yet we take the an entire day to recognize Columbus, one of the biggest pieces of shit in history.
- Status