2020 Election

"Circular firing squad" "Democrats eat their young" These are statements that apply to the Democratic party as long as I can remember. Instead of taring down each other, the whole battalion of candidates should be concentrating on defeating Trump and Moscow Mitch.

 

What if (in a crazy hypothetical scenario) a third party would get the most votes? Would that matter in the current system? Just wondering.

 

No chance it'll happen since the government is owned jointly by the DNC/RNC therefore the Federal Election Commission is also owned and operated by the DNC/RNC.

Should it appear a third party actually could win measures would be taken.

 

I know there's no chance it will happen. Just wondering what American forummers think would happen IF.
There's a bigger chance a majority would vote third party but on different ones. But that's also extremely unlikely because your system discourages it. It equals throwing your vote away under current circumstances, which make it apparent what a worthless form of democracy USA has.

 

It's only as worthless as the people make it, IMO. We're the ones who always say no one else can win.

 

It's probably worse than it seems from the outside. The US has terrible voter participation, it actively discourages third parties, which leads to us being fed false dichotomies and eating ourselves alive.

But oh. It was the best idea anyone had almost 250 years ago, so god forbid we change it even a little.

It was a good country for a while though. We landed on the moon pretty good!

 

Instead of cluttering the political agenda with various "plans" for distributing bread and circuses, what would happen if a party concentrated on electoral reforms to improve democracy? It might take a third party to do this, cuz the two major parties have too much of a stake in the status quo. In particular, three changes would be revolutionary in reforming the political system in a democratic direction: (1) changing the "winner take all" system for distributing votes in the electoral college. (this could be done if enough states agree to it, as two already have); (2) reversal of Citizens United v FEC and other Supreme Court decisions thwarting limits on campaign contributions; and (3) reversal of Supreme Court decisions favoring gerrymandering by victorious parties. The latter two developments of course would require either constitutional amendments or appointment of sensible justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. The major barrier to all of these is that they're too complex and unsexy for American voters to relate to, so it would require a candidate with exceptional persuasive skills to sell it. Can't see that happening in the forseeable future, but I can dream, can't I ?

 

It's going to be okay..

 

Not necessarily.

 

There have been all kinds of changes over the years. All written by lawyers, to keep themselves in office and insulated from public reality.

 

Old Uncle Joe's latest gaffe: "Poor kids are just as bright, just as talented, as white kids."

 

i agree. it's easy to find faults now, but the core of what America was founded on makes it one of the best attempts by humans so far, at creating an equal and free democratic society.

 

Except for the slaves, indigenous americans, and women
And it was always an oligarchy, designed by wealthy white landowners for wealthy white landowners
The only time America could ever be considered fair and equal to everyone is post Jim Crow to present, but that's also when the US really started to go off the rails and getting involved in too many foreign wars involving tiny countries and also working in the interest of corporations versus the people
And now it's turning it's back on the one thing that truly made it great, a liberal immigration policy


Sorry, I just had to be that person

 

yea. that was dumb. I saw it on the news somewhere; maybe fox idk... on one of the sets at the gym. They're tuned to various channels, so I surf a bit. I knew what he meant, but the optics weren't terrific... If nothing else though, it shows that he's aware of the sociological implications of minorities.

 

I would not judge a country on it's ability to land someone on the moon.
Tend to agree with Meliai's comment.

 

It's still a great country... But it doesn't have to be "the best." That's what stupid about it. The sheer egotism of America and Americans.

 

I never thought of Joe as elitist before this. He fails to realize that most of the poor in the US are white people.

I've also encountered plenty of wealthy people who simply don't have a clue about how the rest of us actually live. No common sense at all. But that's nothing new.

 

yes, fair enough.
i suppose i am allowing a "for the time" mentality.
and i'm probably basing my opinion on the ideals rather than the people behind them.

 

I would venture to guess that many wealthy people inherited their fortune, and have never worked a real job in their life.
Example #1, the trump kids.